Judge Rinder -Loan case

P

Ponio_lover

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 July 2016
Messages
56
Visit site
I just caught the last part of a case on Judge Rinder (UK version of Judge Judy) that appeared to involve the loan of a horse. Now I may be wrong as I did miss the first few minutes of it but it would appear that the man involved had loaned a horse from a lady, without a contract. He had the horse for two years and was clearly very attached to it, he also seemingly brought it on a bit in that time. The lady who who owned the horse then got the passport back off him without stating the true reason she wanted it. She then went on to actually sell the horse unbeknown to him for a thousand pounds including tack and rugs (which they kept annoyingly referring to as his wardrobe). The first the man knew of it was when he arrived at his yard that evening and the horse was gone.

The interesting part would be that the judge actually awarded in favour of the man who had him on loan and gave him £2500 compensation from the lady owner. Now although I entirely understand how upset and awful the situation must have been for him, surely this is the problem with loaning without a contract? Where does this put everyone who loans??? Or had she 'gifted' this horse to him, then decided because no money changed hands she was within her rights to have him back???as i say, I did miss the start!

It all seemed a very sad affair, the lady was clearly regretting having done it and the man was gutted to have lost a horse he loved.
 
He felt the horse was gifted because the lady had refused £300 the man had offered her. She said is was on full loan with no contract. She was in the wrong though from what i saw.
 
Ponio_lover said:
ROG, was it on loan or was it gifted??? Not that I suppose you could prove either to be the case without a contract.
Click to expand...

Just watched the first part and so far it seems that the horse was gifted, she originally wanted £300 but after he had been with the new "owner" on trial she told him she wanted no money and also gave him all the tack, she then sold him without telling him because "she felt it was easier to tell him afterwards" it was not a loan and a shame that a £1 sum didn't change hands as that would have sealed the deal.
 
Right. I haven't watched this, but just for information.

First off, the term 'his wardrobe' is entirely correct. It's what he wears.

In the eyes of the law, a contract can be verbal. Only certain contracts need to be in writing to be legal - a credit agreement, for example. As you can see, however, verbal contracts, which can be as base as 'yes, please take him on full loan' can bring all sorts of problems.

So, the man loaned the horse, put a lot of time and effort into getting the horse going correctly, cared for it, fed it, no doubt paid for farrier and vet, and she takes it without telling him and sells it on, effectively making money for no effort whatsoever.

Regardless of whether there was a contract or not, she was in the wrong. No mention of notice period, or compensation for the amount of effort the man put in, or even offering the horse to the man to buy. By removing the horse without notice she breached contract. They had an agreement, she reneged on it.

The BHS has some good information on loaning: http://www.bhs.org.uk/welfare-and-care/buying-and-loaning-horses
 
I've not seen it, but surely if the man thought he had been gifted the horse, then it's passport would have been in his name?

Not legal proof of ownership, but would help man's case - buyer and/or judge would be able to see last owner was the man.
 
Also I should add that I think what happened sucked but was just curious about their original arrangement due to having missed the start!
 
smja said:
I've not seen it, but surely if the man thought he had been gifted the horse, then it's passport would have been in his name?

Not legal proof of ownership, but would help man's case - buyer and/or judge would be able to see last owner was the man.
Click to expand...

In this situation it could have made the difference as the old owner would not have found it so easy to sell the horse but it may not have stopped her trying, the facts were interesting, the man was given £1k as the sales value, £1k for the distress and time off work plus the value of his wardrobe £300, the woman did steal him and sell him and it shows that if you are loaning or gifting that having a proper contract in place is essential, a verbal one will stand but it can be tricky to decide who to believe.
 
be positive said:
In this situation it could have made the difference as the old owner would not have found it so easy to sell the horse but it may not have stopped her trying, the facts were interesting, the man was given £1k as the sales value, £1k for the distress and time off work plus the value of his wardrobe £300, the woman did steal him and sell him and it shows that if you are loaning or gifting that having a proper contract in place is essential, a verbal one will stand but it can be tricky to decide who to believe.
Click to expand...

I saw this too. But she was only able to go and take back the horse (without new owner's knowledge- he'd had it for 2+ years by this time) because he hadn't updated the passport and put it in his own name, when she originally passed the horse onto him. She knew this and made up an excuse about wanting to see the passport to check on the horse's breeding, knowing full well she was going to sell it from under his nose. Despicable woman :(
 
chillipup said:
I saw this too. But she was only able to go and take back the horse (without new owner's knowledge- he'd had it for 2+ years by this time) because he hadn't updated the passport and put it in his own name, when she originally passed the horse onto him. She knew this and made up an excuse about wanting to see the passport to check on the horse's breeding, knowing full well she was going to sell it from under his nose. Despicable woman :(
Click to expand...

She was despicable, although as passports are not proof of ownership she may well have tried to sell even if it had been changed, which it should have been, a contract or receipt is the definitive evidence in law, although I think it should be the passport otherwise they serve little real purpose.
 
Blimey, in that case, what is the point of having a passport? as you say BP they serve little real purpose then. Is it acceptable to buy a horse even if the person who selling the horse isn't named in the passport? Do people do this? I imagined it was like a car log book.
 
Really felt for the man, horrible woman made a quick sum as she was in 'financial trouble'. Just imagine how heartbroken you'd be..
I thought his downfall would be not changing the name in the passport. Agreed, passports serve little purpose if not taken as legal proof of ownership..
 
chillipup said:
Blimey, in that case, what is the point of having a passport? as you say BP they serve little real purpose then. Is it acceptable to buy a horse even if the person who selling the horse isn't named in the passport? Do people do this? I imagined it was like a car log book.
Click to expand...

Nothing like a car log book, I have passports here that have hardly any previous owners names in yet I know they have changed hands several times, technically they should be in the owners name but they don't need to be when you register, or at least last time I registered one they didn't, with BE, no idea about others.

It is illegal to sell without a passport but not illegal to buy a horse without one and passport it yourself, although as it is supposedly illegal to travel without one you could get caught on the way home, basically it is a mess and a badly thought out response to the horse meat crisis.
 
It would be difficult to change the the name in the passport without some kind of proof he was the owner so if he didn't have anything the passport office sometimes contact old owner to verify. A signed sales receipt is usually enough. I've sold a couple of horses who's passports I've never put in my name and my current horses passport isn't in my name but I have a signed receipt for her. Her previous owners wouldn't now the address of where I keep my horses though so I wonder why it was so easy for this horse to be picked up without anyone knowing until after the fact
 
I don't understand why you would take that case to Judge Rinder. If you love the horse then the relief you seek is the return of the horse. The only way to do that is to go through the official legal channels. You can only sell an item with good title. Therefore the person who has the horse now does not have good title. So go get the horse back through the proper channels (if you love it as you say you do). Don't just try to get some cash and your five minutes of fame. Neither of them have covered themselves in glory in my book :)
 
When I sent my pony's passport off to note the change of ownership, the old owner was sent a form to sign stating that she had sold the pony to me. This was the WPCS so not sure if all passport issuing authorities do this or if it's just them.

I subsequently had a lot of hassle of the former owners and I did wonder if the WPCS keep those forms so that they could be produced in court.
 
I saw the first part, but then had to go out, so thank you for posting this as I was interested in the outcome.

Glad the chap won the case, definitely a reason to push for a £1 sale in these sort of circumstances.
 
She came across as a wholly unpleasant woman. I felt so sorry for the guy (even though I think he should have gone to the proper courts, not a TV dancing judge).
 
I am a little confused. Did she ever actually say she is giving him the horse now as his own and doesn't want money for it? If she did then yeah she stole it technically. She refused £300 for it but did she ever say the horse is now his and not a loaned horse?

If it was still a loan then she is technically within her rights to take it back when she wants and do with it what she wants unfortunately. With no contract she doesn't have to say when it will happen either. There have been people on here who have loaned horses and then turned up unannounced to the loanee with a trailer and took the horse away, although there was issues with neglect there which didn't happen here. But that kind of thing does happen.

Think I need to watch this one at some point. Sounds quite interesting. I saw another one about a horse which was loaned too but I think the person loaning the horse sold it that time. Don't think it took rinder long to come to a conclusion there haha.
 
It is a long time since I attended a law lecture and that wasn't even at law school, but I get the feeling that the court looks at the whole situation and judge the case on the balance of probabilities. So, if they don't know what the parties actually agreed because of the lack of evidence, I'd have thought they'd see that the "loaner" had had the horse for two years and paid all the expenses and judge the situation on that. The loaner is acting just like an owner and to a casual observer would be thought the owner. Did the "real" owner even have much contact with the horse over the two years? No? In which case, the presumption is that the "loaner" is the true owner. "Possession is nine points of the law". (Not 9/10ths as frequently quoted -- I do remember that bit!). The original owner had virtually abandoned the horse which has had value added and can't now claim it back.

These "loans" are not uncommon in the gundog world where the enthusiasm of some young trainer is exploited by an unscrupulous owner who then demands the dog back when it is trained! I know one man who was notorious for it and have been a victim myself.

My advice, as usual, is always get it in writing. It doesn't have to be a legal document, just "Hi, I thought I'd drop you a line to confirm what we agreed today....". Ideally, get both parties to sign with a copy of the agreement for each.
 
rachk89 said:
I am a little confused. Did she ever actually say she is giving him the horse now as his own and doesn't want money for it? If she did then yeah she stole it technically. She refused £300 for it but did she ever say the horse is now his and not a loaned horse?

If it was still a loan then she is technically within her rights to take it back when she wants and do with it what she wants unfortunately. With no contract she doesn't have to say when it will happen either. There have been people on here who have loaned horses and then turned up unannounced to the loanee with a trailer and took the horse away, although there was issues with neglect there which didn't happen here. But that kind of thing does happen.

Think I need to watch this one at some point. Sounds quite interesting. I saw another one about a horse which was loaned too but I think the person loaning the horse sold it that time. Don't think it took rinder long to come to a conclusion there haha.
Click to expand...

The horse was never loaned, it went on trial with view to buy and when he offered the money at the end of the trial she said she didn't want anything and from that point he thought he owned the horse, she knew she was in the wrong as if she had genuinely thought it was a loan the first thing she should have done when she needed some money was to approach him and ask for payment. Instead she went behind his back, found a buyer somehow, made up an excuse to borrow the passport and took the horse without telling him, if she had any decency she would have offered to sell him the horse not taken it away while he was at work. his mistake was to not pay a token, get a receipt and to fail to change the passport into his name, all innocent mistakes that are easily made when you trust someone.
She did admit that she gave him the horse and wanted no money as she had only paid £50 for it and wanted the right home.
 
helenalbert said:
She came across as a wholly unpleasant woman. I felt so sorry for the guy (even though I think he should have gone to the proper courts, not a TV dancing judge).
Click to expand...

I presume that it doesnt cost anything to go to the TV - hence people go. In real life it costs money.
 
be positive said:
The horse was never loaned, it went on trial with view to buy and when he offered the money at the end of the trial she said she didn't want anything and from that point he thought he owned the horse, she knew she was in the wrong as if she had genuinely thought it was a loan the first thing she should have done when she needed some money was to approach him and ask for payment. Instead she went behind his back, found a buyer somehow, made up an excuse to borrow the passport and took the horse without telling him, if she had any decency she would have offered to sell him the horse not taken it away while he was at work. his mistake was to not pay a token, get a receipt and to fail to change the passport into his name, all innocent mistakes that are easily made when you trust someone.
She did admit that she gave him the horse and wanted no money as she had only paid £50 for it and wanted the right home.
Click to expand...

Ah right everyone had been saying it was a loan and then it seemed like she basically gave him the horse. Still an interesting one but yeah if she sold it essentially she was a thief in the end.
 
rachk89 said:
There have been people on here who have loaned horses and then turned up unannounced to the loanee with a trailer and took the horse away, although there was issues with neglect there which didn't happen here. But that kind of thing does happen.
Click to expand...

I've done it when I had a horse out on loan, was not at all happy with the standard of care so removed him the next day, without the loaners there. It was stated in the contract that I could do so though.

ossy said:
It would be difficult to change the the name in the passport without some kind of proof he was the owner so if he didn't have anything the passport office sometimes contact old owner to verify. A signed sales receipt is usually enough.
Click to expand...

When I bought Ollycob he came with a passport, weatherbys possibly? I just had to ring them and give them my details and then send the passport in. 3 weeks later my name on the passport (and I changed the horse's name too).

I didn't see it so can't comment otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top