Insuring a horse that's failed a vetting

W

WombatStew

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 May 2011
Messages
335
Location
Lancashire
Visit site
Long story short but loan horse was being sold by his owner. Couldn't afford him at the price she wanted (not that I would if I could as he was massively overpriced). He was sold but failed a flexion test on one hind so now isn't going anywhere. Owner us panicking as she can't afford to keep him long term. He's going for investigations next week. The possibility to buy him at a much lower price has arisen. I'm not concerned about failing the vetting as he's generally been sound the last few years I've had him. Not sure what's going to come from his review next week but where would I stand if I was to buy him from an insurance point of view?
 
i think if he is under £5000 the insurance companies dont insist on a vetting.....this may have changed but i bought my mare for £1900 and insured her with nfu and they didnt ask for a vetting or if she had been vetted. she did fail the vetting on trotting on a circle on the concrete but passed all the other tests so i took a chance as i really liked her and she was cheapish. only started having soundness problems when she was 20 and lost her due to cushings at age 25...hope this helps
 
The problem is that when you go to insure him, they will ask about any previous vettings/conditions.

Flexion tests are often a bit hit and miss, but the point is that he has failed on it, so at the very least the insurance company would either require further investigations or they will exclude that leg from the insurance.
 
I've just insured a horse with Julie Andrews agency, she got it with Scottish equestrian, I've owned this horse for years, but when he went on loan they let the ins laps...yes I know, but they said they would insure him..now he is coming home I've insured him myself..no vet cert asked for he is worth £2000
 
It's irrelevant if they want a vetting because you would be the person insuring him and you know he has failed this vetting. They will ask if he has been vetted. Had he not been vetted then you could just insure him if he was less than their value (depends on company mine is over 5.5k) for needing a vetting.

You'd probably be best to let the owner pay for the investigations and take it from there.
 
I don't think there would be an issue as you didn't have him vetted and presumably you're getting him for rock bottom price.
 
They ask you if you are aware of any previous conditions whether you have had them vetted or not it doesn't matter. You would need to declare what you know.
 
A vetting is one vet's opinion on one day. The only person who has access to the 'failed' vetting is the person who paid the vet. It is feasible that that person changed their mind about buying the horse and exaggerating what the vet told them, You have no proof either way, OP.

You could, of course, explain that you have been loaning this horse for some time and have now bought him, so didn't have a vetting. Who insured the horse while he was on loan?

If the ins co ask for a vet cert, you will have to decide what to do then.Many horses fail flexion tests and continue to work well for many years.


Having said all that, I don't insure, because of the frequency of exclusions
 
Last edited:
It will ask "has this horse ever been vetted" it doesn't matter who vetted it the op knows it's been vetted and to pretend they do not know it failed or even that it had been vetted would be fraud. There is no way round this for an honest person.
 
FfionWinnie said:
It will ask "has this horse ever been vetted" it doesn't matter who vetted it the op knows it's been vetted and to pretend they do not know it failed or even that it had been vetted would be fraud. There is no way round this for an honest person.
Click to expand...

It will ask if the 'insurerer' has had the horse vetted.
 
I recently acquired a horse. I insured it with NFU. They didn't ask anything about its history really and I told them I it had behaviour issues under saddle. No vet certificate asked for. They didn't ask if it had been vetted.
 
The failed vetting is nothing to do with you - any horse you buy could have failed a vetting the week before and you'd be none the wiser. You can answer honestly that you haven't had it vetted and to your knowledge it doesn't suffer with any lameness or health issues. If something is discovered and diagnosed after investigation then you'd need to declare it x
 
FfionWinnie said:
It will ask "has this horse ever been vetted" it doesn't matter who vetted it the op knows it's been vetted and to pretend they do not know it failed or even that it had been vetted would be fraud. There is no way round this for an honest person.
Click to expand...

You are right there's not .
 
Thanks all. I've no intention of lying to any insurance companies more I wanted to know if it would be a case of excluding that leg which sounds like it's the case.
 
I bought my mare for £1500 because of how many behavioural issues she had and I was told she did not need a vetting as was under £3000. I was not actually asked if she had been vetted after I told them how much she was insured for.
 
Last edited:
Lulup said:
You can answer honestly that you haven't had it vetted
Click to expand...

You can, but if the question is "has the horse been vetted", rather than "have you had the horse vrtted", you then get into murky water, because it has, and you know it has.

Lulup said:
and to your knowledge it doesn't suffer with any lameness or health issues. x
Click to expand...

You know the horse has an issue that requires investigation. You can't say that you know it has no issues.

Regardless of how the questions are framed, you have a requirement to declare anything you're aware of, and it's likely that the leg / issue would be excluded.

I'd wait for the results of the investigation before I decided whether to buy, and work on the assumption that whatever it is will need to be paid for by you if you go ahead.
 
Theocat said:
I'd wait for the results of the investigation before I decided whether to buy, and work on the assumption that whatever it is will need to be paid for by you if you go ahead.
Click to expand...

Totally agree although thankfully it sounds like the op intends to be honest unlike some people on this thread who think lying by omission and insurance fraud is acceptable.
 
The horse I had vetted and which failed the flexion tests turned out to have real issue with its hocks (subsequent X ray) and my vet advised said horse would only be fit for light hacking within a year (was an intermediate eventer). Last piece of advice was the best in that OP should check what the subsequent vetting brings up. Also talk to the insurance company. Could be the leg is excluded but could be reinsured after a year.
 
FfionWinnie said:
Totally agree although thankfully it sounds like the op intends to be honest unlike some people on this thread who think lying by omission and insurance fraud is acceptable.
Click to expand...

And the next thing those people will probably be doing is posting complaining about how expensive it is to insure.

A friend of mine has a dentist (with a very recognisable face, hint) who told her that her mare might require treatment, and to get it insured. I thought as she was a retired Police Inspector that I wouldn't have to point out to her that to claim would be fraud.

I hope you get a bargain horse OP, some horses that fail flexions never go unsound.
 
plenty of insurance companies do not requite proof of vetting below a certain value, but they do ask for you to tell them any previous medical conditions.

a friend of mine bought a horse who was i think 1/10 or 2/10th lame on a hind leg when being vetted. But he was 14 and plenty of horses could be a little stiff on flexion depending on the day. However, he later was found to have problems with his suspensorys that resulted in a lot of rehab. due to the report with the very slight lameness the insurance company would not pay out for suspensorys as they deemed it related.
 
I the exact situation but I'll be honest it's never occurred to me!
I got a horse very cheap as previous sale at 3x the price had fallen through due to a failed flexion. I took the risk seeing that the horse was competing right up til the time of the sale and after so obviously had no problem with the leg.
I've since insured him (a few years after buying) and wasn't asked about vetting (which was years ago and not done by me or my vet) I've only insured him for 1k as I just want 3rd party and vet fees so a payback on death is unimportant.
I didn't insure him dishonestly it just didn't occur to me.
Could you call an insurance company and ask? Maybe they will just exclude that leg?
 
poiuytrewq said:
I the exact situation but I'll be honest it's never occurred to me!
I got a horse very cheap as previous sale at 3x the price had fallen through due to a failed flexion. I took the risk seeing that the horse was competing right up til the time of the sale and after so obviously had no problem with the leg.
I've since insured him (a few years after buying) and wasn't asked about vetting (which was years ago and not done by me or my vet) I've only insured him for 1k as I just want 3rd party and vet fees so a payback on death is unimportant.
I didn't insure him dishonestly it just didn't occur to me.
Could you call an insurance company and ask? Maybe they will just exclude that leg?
Click to expand...

I don't think you have been dishonest - there's a world of difference between not mentioning a single failed flexion test that occurred several years ago in a horse that has been sound and working happily since, and a horse that has only just failed and is currently under investigation for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top