Legal Eagles help please!

[barnum]

I wonder if anyone can suggest what to do next without spending a lot of money.
Friend bought a young event horse from an eventing/stud yard (professionals) just over 2 years ago, horse was vetted in his winter woolies. When he shed out it was found that he had scars in the girth area where sarcoids had been removed and they were starting to regrow, more started in the groin area and on a stifle. Horse obviously unrideable. Friend contacted vet who confirmed he had asked if there were any sarcoid problems when vetting and had been told 'no' , Friend had also asked about sarcoids when trying the horse and had a friend present who could confirm that she was told there had been no problems.
On contacting previous owners (dealers) who had bred the horse and had him operated on for the sarcoids denied any knowledge.
Friend contacted solicitor and proceedings started for small claims court purchase price was £5K. This dragged on for nearly 2 years with previous owners insisting on visiting several times and getting court date put back as not convenient, finally went to court, many pictures, vet statement provided re question at vetting, friend statement and attendance at court, paperwork showing that horse had been operated on by vendors vet at their request. Statement that horse has been unrideable and has cost a fortune in treating all the sarcoids.
Judge dismissed the claim, believed vendor that stud and eventing yard were run as separate businesses by husband and wife and vendor didn't know spouse had horse operated on. We are all devasted for my friend, she had spent all her money on this horse as a last fling at eventing (getting on in years Embarrassed) every last penny has been spent on treating this horse who is a dear boy but still being treated and girth area remains uncomfortable so unrideable with no real prospect of getting back to work.
We believed that if a horse was sold by a dealer it had the same protection in law as if buying a car for instance and if a car dealer denied knowing that a car had faults would still be liable.
Any ideas please????????

 

[Kat]

Firstly I don't know why she was proceeding in the small claims court if the purchase price was £5k because when she added on expenses such as vetinary treatment this would have exceeded the small claims limit. Proceeding in the fast track has advantages, as you can put more pressure on the otherside with offers and you have a prospect of recovering your own costs.

Anyway, legal advice, I think the issue is that when you sue a business you are suing the business as an entity if one business sold the horse and the previous owner, a separate business had the surgery done then you would have to prove that the seller knew about the treatment done by the previous owner.

If the judge found as a matter of fact that he believed that the seller did not know then the seller has sold honestly and the case will fail. As this is a finding of fact not law there will probably not be grounds for appeal.

However she could still make a complaint about both businesses to trading standards.

You do have additional protection when buying from a dealer but there is still an element of buyer beware.

The only other avenue I can see is the vet..... if he should have picked it up she may have some recourse there, but if the scars couldn't be seen and he asked the question then he has probably done everything he should have.

 

[barnum]

Thankyou Katt, sound advice and I'll pass it on.