Livery Yard Responsibility for Injured Pony

C

cavalier123

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 December 2010
Messages
286
Visit site
Trying to keep this short, the background is as follows: My pony was on full livery and also has a neurological deficit (mild wobblers) which the yard were aware of. I had been working hard with a physio and had just had the go ahead from the vet to ride the pony again, when pony had to be kept in for a few days due to weight issues... I realised this would mean that the yard would tie the pony to a post and rail fence (only place for tying up, where all liveries are tied), I asked them to muck him out in his stable because if tied to the fence he WILL put his head through it, in order to get to the haylage that falls from the nets onto the other side of the fence and with his neurological problems it would be serious if he pulled back quickly and caught himself, , they acknowledge that they would muck him out in stable and not tie him to the fence. The next morning when I arrived pony looked very sorry for himself and when I examined him he had a big lump on the side of his neck. I asked the yard owner if they had tied him to the fence and she said they had because she didn't pass the message on due to being at dentists, she also said that he hadn't put his head through the fence (not that they had seen anyway...) Vet came out and the result is the pony is now severely neurological and we don't know if he will ever recover again.. I am so upset and angry and I have moved the pony to a new yard on DIY. I have taken legal advice and I believe I have a case for negligence / duty of care, and understand that it would be based on my proving that he would reasonably have been expected to put his head through the rails, i.e greedy, hungry pony, haylage on other side of fence and past behavior and maybe even just based on behavior of any horse / pony in that situation. I am so angry not only because of what has happened to my pony, but the yard have been absolutely horrible about it and made me out to be in the wrong for being upset about this. Please let me know your thoughts, do you consider this to be negligent? Thanks for reading.
 
It is so tricky.
I can completely understand why you are upset, and maybe legally the yard were negligent - who knows?
All I would say is everyone is human and makes mistakes, I'm sure they didn't do this maliciously.
Furthermore my gut feeling is that a horse with wobblers is a ticking time bomb, if it wasnt this incident it would have been something else.

I have been in a situation whereby my horse sustained injury through an accident at a yard (debatable negligence), further compounded by the yard lying to my face about the cause. I removed my horse from the yard but didn't take it up legally, and my suggestion is that you don't either.
 
Oh no, so so sorry to hear this. I would also be livid in your shoes!

You specifically arranged instructions regarding your horse to minimise any situation that could potentially cause further neurological damage to your horse. This was agreed to but ignored resulting in serious complications to your horses welfare and to those around him.

It is not, imo, unreasonable to believe that ANY horse regardless of physical health would potentially suffer injury via being tied to and placing head/neck through post and rail fence to reach food. To prevent such injury any horse would need to be tied on a short rope to prevent the capacity to place head/neck through. This clearly didn't happen. The fact your horse has Wobblers should be irrelevant, but as it is relevant in this case and particularly YO aware of condition, it is absolutely negligent, IMO.
 
Do you have proof that your pony injured himself as a result of being tied up? It sounds very coincidental.

That being said, they shouldn't have gone against your wishes in the first place. Very annoying to say the least.

I can't really offer any insight into whether you would have a case or not - that's down to your solicitor to be honest. But if I were to hazard a guess, you wouldn't.
 
It would be a very shakey case if you were to sue as you would have to prove endangerment. It would also be vet expensive and stressful. You could take them to small claims court for vets bills as a result of the incident but you would have to prove that their actions cause the injury and not that it was an accident caused by the condition itself.
 
Thanks for your reply. My understanding from the solicitor is they could be considered legally negligent, if I can prove it should have been expected that he would put his head through the rails.. I would agree not malicious but a general attitude of fussy client, not urgent seems to be the norm, so lack of care...Regarding the wobblers, my vet has said the same, but he was so stable a few months ago with all the physio he literally had no symptoms so with appropriate care and elimination of as many risks as possible I am still hoping... And yes I probably will not take it any further either, once I have calmed down!!!
ihatework said:
It is so tricky.
I can completely understand why you are upset, and maybe legally the yard were negligent - who knows?
All I would say is everyone is human and makes mistakes, I'm sure they didn't do this maliciously.
Furthermore my gut feeling is that a horse with wobblers is a ticking time bomb, if it wasnt this incident it would have been something else.

I have been in a situation whereby my horse sustained injury through an accident at a yard (debatable negligence), further compounded by the yard lying to my face about the cause. I removed my horse from the yard but didn't take it up legally, and my suggestion is that you don't either.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for your reply - you have summed up exactly how I am feeling about it - ANY horse should be tied suitably short so as not to get their head through and this definitly doesn't happen, not even close to it...
Illusion100 said:
Oh no, so so sorry to hear this. I would also be livid in your shoes!

You specifically arranged instructions regarding your horse to minimise any situation that could potentially cause further neurological damage to your horse. This was agreed to but ignored resulting in serious complications to your horses welfare and to those around him.

It is not, imo, unreasonable to believe that ANY horse regardless of physical health would potentially suffer injury via being tied to and placing head/neck through post and rail fence to reach food. To prevent such injury any horse would need to be tied on a short rope to prevent the capacity to place head/neck through. This clearly didn't happen. The fact your horse has Wobblers should be irrelevant, but as it is relevant in this case and particularly YO aware of condition, it is absolutely negligent, IMO.
Click to expand...
 
No proof, only a set of circumstances that he was fine when he went into his stable in the evening, the yard didn't tell me he had any problems in the morning when they mucked him out so would assume nothing happened over night and the only other place he had been before I arrived was tied to the fence and I don't tie him to the fence because he will CONSTANTLY and without fail put his head through to eat the scraps of haylage on the other side...
Moomin1 said:
Do you have proof that your pony injured himself as a result of being tied up? It sounds very coincidental.

That being said, they shouldn't have gone against your wishes in the first place. Very annoying to say the least.

I can't really offer any insight into whether you would have a case or not - that's down to your solicitor to be honest. But if I were to hazard a guess, you wouldn't.
Click to expand...
 
I'm sorry your pony got injured. Although it sounds like the yard was negligent, I'm not sure there'd be any benefit in pursuing it. As he already had a serious condition any compensation would have to reflect his value (an awful way of looking at it but it's the only thing a court could make a judgement on) Vet fees would be the other thing you could claim for, but it doesn't sound like you've had much treatment. It sounds like it would take a lot of heartache, effort and money to pursue it for not much return. Often in these case, the only winners are the lawyers.
 
I'm a horse owner with a small yard and studied law. I hope you find this useful. In order for you to make any claim against the yard you have to prove wrong doing on 3 things, 1. a duty of care, 2. the duty of care was breached, 3. the breach caused the damage, and the damage was not too "remote".
It's actually more difficult than one would anticipate, with each of the 3 requirements treated individually. My advice before you take any action would be to consider the following:-
1. Can you afford it, it may be very costly
2. Have you got any actual proof ie video evidence of the actual event or written statements from anyone who witnessed the incident first hand (otherwise it's just here say)
You will also have to seriously consider
1. Your vet didn't witness any incident and as the horse has what I would consider a very serious neurological disorder (wobblers) which is prone to significant changes at any stage, you have no professional witness.
2. How can "you" prove that your horse did not injure itself in the stable.
3. Has the horse got any stable vices, that will put doubt on your case. ie rubbing, weaving, anxiety etc and that the yard may be able to prove.
You must also be careful how you vent your anger against the yard, if they are innocent they make take action of their own
I'm sure your very upset that your horse has had a set back and I hope it makes a recovery and that your find this information useful.
 
I can't imagine that any horse with neurological problems moving from yard to yard can do it any good! I believe this is wat you do and also cause trouble on your way! You will soon get a bad name for yourself so my advice is keep yourself to yourself and find a permanent home for your horse to be happy!
 
hindburn said:
I can't imagine that any horse with neurological problems moving from yard to yard can do it any good! I believe this is wat you do and also cause trouble on your way! You will soon get a bad name for yourself so my advice is keep yourself to yourself and find a permanent home for your horse to be happy!
Click to expand...

Hindburn, I see you created your post to my thread the day that you created your log in and that you have not posted to any other threads since, this was nearly two weeks ago - so, looks to me like YOU are the trouble causer, NOT me!!! You are clearly associated with the yard in some way and so you know what the real truth is!

I have got a good mind to name and shame you, but I'm better than that - I will just take the legal route!
 
Hi, I have just had the first email alert that someone had added to this thread so looked. I was quite surprised by your response and re read your previous threads. You stated in one of these that "My understanding from the solicitor is they could be considered legally negligent, if I can prove it should have been expected that he would put his head through the rails", but you have not got any proof that your horse did put it's head through the rails, you merely decided that this was the set of circumstances and as I stated previously you would either have to have written statements off someone who witnessed the event first hand or video evidence which was recorded showing the time and date of which you admit you have neither. In your reply to Hindburn you again have assumed a lot. As someone who dealt in law, I would be interested to know how in this set off circumstances you could prove it should have been expected that he would put his head through the rails. Another example of this would be "my horse was fine when I left it yesterday, but having brought it in from the field it's now lame", so did it go lame because of something that was waiting to happen, ( we all know that a horse can spring an injury at any time) because it was galloping around being silly,was it kicked or was it something the yard groom did? Who knows, or should I "expect" that it would go lame at some point, either way if looking for someone to blame, I have no proof. On another note, you placed this on an open forum, expect to get a variety of opinions as those that take part are entitled to give.
 
Stablename its not the same as lameness at all. Most horses can be expected to be turned out and not come in lame for any reason the majority of the time. Most horses, if tied to a fence, can be expected to successfully put their head through the rails each time, in an attempt to reach grass on the other side.
 
Sugar_and _Spice, Cavalier123 makes no mention of grass, but the possibility of spilt haylage being the temptation and reason for the horse to place it's head through the fence (if it did). However, as Cavalier123 states she wasn't at the stables at the time of the "apparent" event, then how does he/she know that there were any scraps of haylage on the floor, yards get brushed, the area could have been free from haylage. Trust me these are very valid points in a court room. My point was that unless you witness something first hand and can prove what you witnessed everything else is worthless. In law it is for Cavalier123 to prove the accident happened, not for the stables to prove it didn't. Equally horses get lumps and bumps all the time, they just happen. Never actually witnessed a lump appearing as it happens on my horses, my horses appear to be a little crafty, lumps just happen in the middle of the night.
 
stablename said:
Hi, I have just had the first email alert that someone had added to this thread so looked. I was quite surprised by your response and re read your previous threads. You stated in one of these that "My understanding from the solicitor is they could be considered legally negligent, if I can prove it should have been expected that he would put his head through the rails", but you have not got any proof that your horse did put it's head through the rails, you merely decided that this was the set of circumstances and as I stated previously you would either have to have written statements off someone who witnessed the event first hand or video evidence which was recorded showing the time and date of which you admit you have neither. In your reply to Hindburn you again have assumed a lot. As someone who dealt in law, I would be interested to know how in this set off circumstances you could prove it should have been expected that he would put his head through the rails. Another example of this would be "my horse was fine when I left it yesterday, but having brought it in from the field it's now lame", so did it go lame because of something that was waiting to happen, ( we all know that a horse can spring an injury at any time) because it was galloping around being silly,was it kicked or was it something the yard groom did? Who knows, or should I "expect" that it would go lame at some point, either way if looking for someone to blame, I have no proof. On another note, you placed this on an open forum, expect to get a variety of opinions as those that take part are entitled to give.
Click to expand...

Stablename, thanks for your opinions. I appreciate you are somebody who has dealt in law, however, my solicitor has informed me that video evidence is not necessary and that merely the fact that "a horse tied to a fence with haylage on the other side, could be REASONABLY EXPECTED to put his head through the post and rail fence to get to the haylage" is enough proof in itself. I could have got a video of him doing this consistently, very easily, by just tying him to the fence, but was advised by my solicitor this wasn't necessary.
With regards to your later remark: possibility of spilt haylage being the temptation and reason for the horse to place it's head through the fence (if it did). However, as Cavalier123 states she wasn't at the stables at the time of the "apparent" event, then how does he/she know that there were any scraps of haylage on the floor, yards get brushed, the area could have been free from haylage. It was not a possibility of spilt haylage, there is always haylage on the other side of the fence as it falls out of the nets tied to the fence onto the arena, it is not on the yard so does not get brushed away and it does not blow away either.
Yes, anybody can give whatever opinion they want, but if somebody is going to call me names then I also have the right to respond to that.
 
Sugar_and_Spice said:
Stablename its not the same as lameness at all. Most horses can be expected to be turned out and not come in lame for any reason the majority of the time. Most horses, if tied to a fence, can be expected to successfully put their head through the rails each time, in an attempt to reach grass on the other side.
Click to expand...

Yes you are right and this is the point Sugar_and_Spice, "can be reasonably expected to put their head through the fence" is sufficient proof.
 
stablename said:
I'm a horse owner with a small yard and studied law. 2. Have you got any actual proof ie video evidence of the actual event or written statements from anyone who witnessed the incident first hand (otherwise it's just here say)
.
Click to expand...

cavalier123 said:
Stablename, thanks for your opinions. I appreciate you are somebody who has dealt in law, .
Click to expand...

I would expect some-one who has studied law to any useful standard to know that it is 'hearsay', rather than 'here say'. The incorrect spelling shows a lack of understanding of the term.
 
Hmmm, I suspect the key factor in this case would not actually be being able to prove the pony put his head through and fell over as a result. As others have said you must prove endangerment and negligence, both of which you have from the yard owners acknowledgement of the fact that the horse was indeed tied up contrary to your instructions because she did not pass on your instructions, and that this was done with the full knowledge (on the yard owners part) of the horses neurological condition and the potential serious risk involved with tying the horse up. There you have negligence and endangerment. Whether the pony fell because it put its head through the bars or just as an incident during being tied up is inconsequential. But for the fact that the yo did not pass on the instructions the pony would never have been tied up outside. Infact even if he had a fall he would have had a soft landing in the stable, and ultimately a far safer environment.
 
A lot of people are talking about proof - just as a point of law proof is not required for a civil case it is ' on the balance of probability' ... However apart from your vets fees for the lump on the neck you have to show 'loss' and for a horse with ' wobblers' this is going to be minimal as the animal is financially worth nothing.
 
Queenbee said:
Hmmm, I suspect the key factor in this case would not actually be being able to prove the pony put his head through and fell over as a result. As others have said you must prove endangerment and negligence, both of which you have from the yard owners acknowledgement of the fact that the horse was indeed tied up contrary to your instructions because she did not pass on your instructions, and that this was done with the full knowledge (on the yard owners part) of the horses neurological condition and the potential serious risk involved with tying the horse up. There you have negligence and endangerment. Whether the pony fell because it put its head through the bars or just as an incident during being tied up is inconsequential. But for the fact that the yo did not pass on the instructions the pony would never have been tied up outside. Infact even if he had a fall he would have had a soft landing in the stable, and ultimately a far safer environment.
Click to expand...
Thanks for clarifying this Queenbee. This is what the solicitor explained, but much less clearly!
 
blitznbobs said:
A lot of people are talking about proof - just as a point of law proof is not required for a civil case it is ' on the balance of probability' ... However apart from your vets fees for the lump on the neck you have to show 'loss' and for a horse with ' wobblers' this is going to be minimal as the animal is financially worth nothing.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your comment. Agree that financially there probably won't be any gain and if the yard had shown any remorse for what had happened, or just even been more understanding and had treated me well until this point and after, then I wouldn't be looking to take this any further, but they didn't and I have had enough of being walked all over by supposed responsible adults, who should know better!
 
Personally I don't see how you can prove it I'm afraid. If there was CCTV footage then maybe BUT you'd also have to have proof that you had told them specifically not to tie him to the fence (did you do it via text or email?). I also highly doubt the yard would give you the CCTV footage if they did have any.
 
Pearlsasinger & Cavalier123, An educated person would know that typo's, dyslexia or spell check picking up the wrong word or phrase which had gone unnoticed are not the same as "someone's lack of understanding of a term".
 
MagicMelon said:
Personally I don't see how you can prove it I'm afraid. If there was CCTV footage then maybe BUT you'd also have to have proof that you had told them specifically not to tie him to the fence (did you do it via text or email?). I also highly doubt the yard would give you the CCTV footage if they did have any.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your comment MagicMelon. No CCTV footage, but I do have proof of my request and their acknowledgement as I did it by text. As discussed, according to solicitor, proof is not required. See explanation from Queenbee for reasons why.
 
Please do go to your lawyer and please do keep spending your money taking a pretty worthless case to court, just to teach the yard a lesson and to stop yourself being walked over.

I live and keep my horses on the proceeds of a lawyers work so I am all in favour. KEEP GOING!!
 
I'm sorry, but I think you are making far too much of this. I really don't think that someone not passing on an instruction because they were at the dentist is actually negligent. It is common circumstances that arise in any workplace. Had the YO purposely ignored your request and actually told the groom to tie the horse to the fence, then that would be different. The groom themselves is not negligent either because they would not have known about the instruction.
 
I would be furious, hurt, angry, and all the rest. I do actually think you have a case as you pointed out the risks beforehand, and requested that this action was not done to your horse. The owner then agreed to take action on your behalf due to the risks and did not.

I guess you would be "after" the vets bills, and loss of enjoyment of your horse, and costs of keeping said horse until it is fit to perform his purpose, as he was ready to do until the incident. I do think on the balance of probabilities (including you foreseeing the event) that an incident occurred. I do thenk the yard has been negligent.

HOWEVER I do not think that legal action will make you happy. It is hard to be called a liar, it will all get very emotional, you will be more than sad, the horse will not be made better.

In the words of a very wise horseman (Mark Rashid) ..... "do you want to be right or do you want to be happy"?

For what its worth I think you are right. I think you have done the right thing moving your horse. I wish you well, and that you can find a silver lining in all this mess, or you will be sad for a long time.

I had a similar situation (a drink driver drove up the backside of my horse and the Police did not investigate it properly), I was very unhappy for a very long time. In the end, I had gathered a lot of "evidence", and I realised that anyone that would read the evidence and make a reasoned decision did not need to read it, they just believed me. Those who did not believe me would not really read the evidence.

When push came to shove my horse was injured, he did recover, and I knew what had happened and anyone who I REALLY cared about knew what I said was right, and anyone who did not really did not matter.

I did start legal action but it made me miserable. I dropped it, and in the words of Mark Rashid, I decided it was more important to be happy than right.

A one point I thought I was "fighting" for my horse, then I realised that he did not care or even understand. He was where he was with his injuries, and we tended to them, and I was lucky as he did recover.

I hope your horse recovers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top