Loaner unfortunately lost horse but now in tricky situation...

Wow, what an easy way to get enough cash to buy a horse I can't afford ! Take a very expensive horse on loan, have horse put to sleep for a spurious reason and cash in on insurance. Then replace horse with one which belongs to me - result !

I know this is extremely facetious however that's how the OP comes across. Not that I'm insinuating the poor animal lost its life with the intention of the loaner profiting from its loss but the whole situation is as distasteful .

The owner has lost out and should be recompensed . Full stop .
 
Disposal costs are usually covered by insurance.

You wouldn't expect to rent a house for five years and if it burned down get the insurance money, why so with a horse.

It makes no difference whether you have paid for the upkeep of the horse for five years - that's what a loan is!!!! If you don't want to do that, then buy a horse instead!!

I also think its harsh to say owner didn't care because horse is out on long term loan - there are many reasons horses are loaned, mainly because the owners care what happens to the horse in the future. Those that don't care sell - to dealers or sales!
 
Haven't read it all, sorry. Was there a reasonable belief by the OP that the loan was to be permanent? If so, it completely changes the picture as to whether it is ethical for her to have the money, as it is now needed to buy a replacement if she can't, as is likely, find a similar permanent loan.

I actually find it odd that after five continuous years of loaning to the same person, the owner would want to be paid for the horse. How likely is it that they would ever have taken the horse back and sold it? It doesn't seem to me that they have lost any money they were ever going to get.

Quite the reverse, they have lost the possibility of having a sick or elderly horse returned to them to cost them money.

While the person who loaned the horse is almost certainly going to face expense to replace it.

The loaner is perfectly entitled to insure her potential replacement cost if someone will take her premiums. If the owner wanted cover, they should have insured for themselves.
 
Last edited:
You don't get a payout when your horse dies unless it is insured. It isn't a 'right' of horse ownership. The OP paid to insure this horse. The owner chose not to. Why should the OP hand over the premium on an insurance policy she paid for? If the owner wanted this cover, she should have paid for it herself.

And people comparing it to writing off a leased car - it's a legal requirement to pay for insurance on a car. You'll also have signed something to say that any premium belongs to the leasing company. The OP chose to insure for LOU. There is no requirement. It was an extra on her behalf.
 
Last edited:
What an interesting thread. I am really on the fence with this one, swayed by every good point!

I have been following it on my iPad sitting with my husband and son , with an endless flow of football on the telly. They can't believe I am " still on THAT FORUM!", so I gave them the outline of it Even they had to admit it's an interesting one.
 
melbiswas said:
What an interesting thread. I am really on the fence with this one, swayed by every good point!

I have been following it on my iPad sitting with my husband and son , with an endless flow of football on the telly. They can't believe I am " still on THAT FORUM!", so I gave them the outline of it Even they had to admit it's an interesting one.
Click to expand...

Well ... Anything but the footy .... ARGH! But I had the same discussion with my OH while we were walking the dog this morning.

To me, the point isn't who actually owned the horse, it's who bothered to insure it and pay the premiums. As I said earlier, the loaner should pay the owner the 50% they've asked for! ... but deduct from that the premiums they've paid over the 5 years. Without them, everyone would be out of pocket. At the end of the day, it was not OP's fault the horse died.

I had my horse on loan for 6 months before buying him from someone who is still a good friend. I'm going to ask her about this out of interest ...
 
risky business said:
I agree with this.

Owners signed a letter to say they were happy for this to go ahead money wise too. Was hardly done without consent and sneakyness.
Click to expand...

Twice I have mentioned this and twice it has been ignored - the OP states that the owner agreed to let her keep the money from the insurance claim and this was agreed in writing. Doesnt appear to be any uproar about owner going back on original agreement though
 
conniegirl said:
Illusion, I wouldnt lend you so much as a pen if that is how you treat other peoples property.

Its stories like this that completely put me off loaning any horse or pony ever again.
I had a gorgeous 12.2hh perfect 1st or second pony, he did everything from tiny tots lead rein to eventing for pony club teams! he was worth his weight in gold. When my sister, my cousin and I alloutgrew this pony he was put out on loan,not because we didnt care but because we did! The pony was happiest in a job, doing something but was hopeessly outgrown and we did not want to lose control of his future.
He gave many young girls great joy as very few people can afford or find a pony like him, but it is loaners like you that eventualy ment he sat in our field doing nothing for the best part of 8 years as we couldnt trust Loaners with our precious pony!

If something is lent to you then you must return it when asked to. As the OP can no longer return the horse then she must return the horses value.

People are forever bemoaning the fact that there are no good loan horses/ponies available or that the animals owners are crazy/controlling/idiots (take your pi of the colourful names I've heard given to horse owners who loan thier animal out) but is it realy suprising no one is willing to loan out horses when the attitude of loaners tends to be of wanting everything for nothing! by loaning a horse you are not helping the owner, they are helping you!
Click to expand...

'....loaners like you...'???. Assume much, eh?!!! Never loaned a horse off anyone in my life, but I have loaned a horse to others with a detailed contract in place (responsible owners do this, you know).
 
Shutterbug said:
Twice I have mentioned this and twice it has been ignored - the OP states that the owner agreed to let her keep the money from the insurance claim and this was agreed in writing. Doesnt appear to be any uproar about owner going back on original agreement though
Click to expand...

Quite simply, this.
 
Teabiscuit - 'repay' them for what? You don't put a horse on loan to gain a financial profit. Usually there would be none. The owner chose not to insure horse for LOU. OP chose to insure horse. Owner also signed to say they agreed any premiums would be OPs as they had opted to pay for LOU - something that they didn't have to do. What exactly does the OP owe the owner?
 
I think this thread sums up the difference between legal and ethical correctness.

Legally, I'd agree- her insurance, her payment. It will, of course, hinge on the terms of her policy and her right to insure the horse in the first place.

Ethically, huuugge grey area. Personally, I'd return the money and find a new loan- with a properly written agreement. It doesn't seen ethically sound to benefit from the tragic loss of someone else's horse.

Two other things which stuck out for me; firstly, loaning a horse is not (usually) the same as borrowing. It's a business agreement where money changes hands.

Secondly, having loaned the horse, the owner could always choose to sell it, if he or she hit a financial bump. So there is still a financial loss to the owner.

I think the big takeaway here is to get a proper loan agreement and have all this sort of thing in writing.
 
LadyGascoyne said:
I think this thread sums up the difference between legal and ethical correctness.

Legally, I'd agree- her insurance, her payment. It will, of course, hinge on the terms of her policy and her right to insure the horse in the first place.

Ethically, huuugge grey area. Personally, I'd return the money and find a new loan- with a properly written agreement. It doesn't seen ethically sound to benefit from the tragic loss of someone else's horse.

Two other things which stuck out for me; firstly, loaning a horse is not (usually) the same as borrowing. It's a business agreement where money changes hands.

Secondly, having loaned the horse, the owner could always choose to sell it, if he or she hit a financial bump. So there is still a financial loss to the owner.

I think the big takeaway here is to get a proper loan agreement and have all this sort of thing in writing.
Click to expand...

The owner CHOSE to take the financial risk of not insuring the horse. They CHOSE to risk losing out in terms of any future monies from selling the horse in case of LOU.
Why is everyone questioning OP's ethics and not the ethics of the owner who has gone back on her word and expects to benefit from someone elses payment of LOU insurance?
 
Elsiecat said:
The owner CHOSE to take the financial risk of not insuring the horse. They CHOSE to risk losing out in terms of any future monies from selling the horse in case of LOU.
Why is everyone questioning OP's ethics and not the ethics of the owner who has gone back on her word and expects to benefit from someone elses payment of LOU insurance?
Click to expand...

Exactly! Owner has gone "oh yeah you can insure the horse and pay the monthly premiums, and if anything happens you can keep the money from any claim" this constitutes an agreement. And then when horse has died she has promptly changed her mind and asked for half the money - this small fact is being overlooked in favour of everyone getting on their moral high horses and lambasting the OP without taking into consideration all the facts of the original post
 
OP's money paid for the insurance - I get and agree this.

Owner didnt take out insurance, therefore can not expect to be given the payout - to a degree I get this.

Owner loaned OP a horse worth x amount of money that horse is now dead an OP has lost out financially so whats right to me is OP gets her insurance payout as owner agreed and owner then bills OP for financial loss.

Horse died at an event, collapsed after a jump and died shortly after. Sadly horses are easily broke but OP was aware she was borrowing property belonging to someone else that one day would be required to be returned.

The fact that OP paid for horse for 5 years tbh has no relevance to me. Also just for clarification the horse could not of been insured twice so owner could not of insured horse.

OP for me would or should of took out insurance to cover this very situation to make sure if anything happened to the horse the debt to owner was covered.

If you was to go get a vehicle on hire tomorrow kept it for a year crashed it into a wall would you expect the leasing company to just let you off paying them for the vehicle you are leasing because you put petrol in it, taxed it, got it mot'd and changed its tyres?

Yes she might not have to give owner the payout but she needs to reimburse owner the financial loss of her asset
 
DEEDEE83 said:
Yes she might not have to give owner the payout but she needs to reimburse owner the financial loss of her asset
Click to expand...

I've never heard of a loan where you have to pay the owner the value of the horse upon the horse's death. Unless it was agreed (which I don't think it was) then this is simply not the case.
I wouldn't dream of asking someone for the value of my horse if the horse died whilst they had it on loan. My risk. My problem. If I wanted to have the chance of getting the horses value back in the event of the horse's death then I would have insured it for LOU.
 
DEEDEE83 said:
If you was to go get a vehicle on hire tomorrow kept it for a year crashed it into a wall would you expect the leasing company to just let you off paying them for the vehicle you are leasing because you put petrol in it, taxed it, got it mot'd and changed its tyres?
Click to expand...

If I had an agreement in place which said I could, yes I would. And this is the crux of the matter - the owner said the OP could keep any monies received from a claim and agreed to this in writing - something most people responding are choosing to completely ignore.
 
As for who pays for disposal, obviously the horse's owner does. Its her horse.

Of course the loaners have paid for the horse for the past five years - that's what you do when you have a horse on loan!!

When I've loaned horses out previously I've not insured the horse as I've expected the loanee to cover all bills as they would for a horse they owned, this includes the insurance, it doesn't mean I've given them the horse. Luckily, we never crossed this bridge where the loaners could have gone off with his value if he'd died. I would never have even thought someone could be so hard and selfish.

I've had a horse out on loan to one family for five years, I rarely saw it because I was happy with how it was looked after and didn't want to be an annoying owner (and I was friends with half the instructors locally, who regularly let me know how he was). When the horse got old and ill he was returned to me and I paid his vets bills and the cost of having him PTS and disposed of when the time came.

It does highlight the need for a massively watertight contract if you loan a horse out, or even that its not worth bothering loaning one unless you are prepared to write it off and let someone else take the money.
 
Honey08 said:
It does highlight the need for a massively watertight contract if you loan a horse out, or even that its not worth bothering loaning one unless you are prepared to write it off and let someone else take the money.
Click to expand...

The owner signed a contract that stated the OP got the value of any potential premiums from the insurance...
 
DEEDEE83 said:
Horse died at an event, collapsed after a jump and died shortly after. Sadly horses are easily broke but OP was aware she was borrowing property belonging to someone else that one day would be required to be returned.
Click to expand...

How do you know this? Did OP say?
 
Sorry cant quote but from the OPs blog it took me to her instagram page and it stated on there he died at at an event. Collapsed just after a fence, I feel for the OP she genuinely appeared to love the horse. He was in great condition and was a beautiful looking animal but its tainted (for me
 
It isn't just the OP who I now wouldn't loan a horse to - the list is growing... I will now be using this thread as a point of reference if I ever advertise mine for loan.
 
Elsiecat said:
The owner signed a contract that stated the OP got the value of any potential premiums from the insurance...
Click to expand...

So the OP said, although hasn't come back to expand or clarify on this, so am not even convinced they did. Owner may not have realised what they were signing, or that it was for death value, not vets bills. They seem a pretty easy going, trusting owner that let the loaner get on with things. Perhaps people started to tell them they were being ripped off and OP was claiming a lot of money on their horse without thinking of giving a penny to them? It would pee me off enough to chase them too.

Horse had done two BE80s.
 
Fides said:
It isn't just the OP who I now wouldn't loan a horse to - the list is growing... I will now be using this thread as a point of reference if I ever advertise mine for loan.
Click to expand...

So you agree with an owner going back on an agreement? The list of people I wouldn't loan from is growing.
 
Honey08 said:
So the OP said, although hasn't come back to expand or clarify on this, so am not even convinced they did. Owner may not have realised what they were signing, or that it was for death value, not vets bills. They seem a pretty easy going, trusting owner that let the loaner get on with things. Perhaps people started to tell them they were being ripped off and OP was claiming a lot of money on their horse without thinking of giving a penny to them? It would pee me off enough to chase them too.

Horse had done two BE80s.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but we only have OP's version of events to form opinions from.
If the owner had paid for their own insurance or had made a different agreement with the loanee regarding LOU payout - then my opinion would be entirely different. But based on the agreement that OP says was in place - and based on presuming both parties would be true to their 'word' - then in my opinion, the OP is in the right. I think posters are basing what they think should happen with the payout on what agreement they would put in place during a loan - not what agreement WAS in place.
 
Elsiecat said:
I've never heard of a loan where you have to pay the owner the value of the horse upon the horse's death.
Click to expand...
It is in my case, assuming that the 21 yo mare I have on loan died an accidental death (ie not from illness). She is insured by me, through SEIB, on their veterans plan, and they know she is a loan horse. It is all detailed in the loan agreement. I would get the payout and then forward it to the owner.

If she dies or has to be pts from illness, there would be no insurance payout and the owner does not get any money from me. (The mare has Cushing's and is therefore very difficult to insure for illness). Owner is fine with this.

A detailed, watertight loan agreement from the off is essential.
 
Honey08 said:
So the OP said, although hasn't come back to expand or clarify on this, so am not even convinced they did. Owner may not have realised what they were signing, or that it was for death value, not vets bills. They seem a pretty easy going, trusting owner that let the loaner get on with things. Perhaps people started to tell them they were being ripped off and OP was claiming a lot of money on their horse without thinking of giving a penny to them? It would pee me off enough to chase them too.

Horse had done two BE80s.
Click to expand...

And perhaps the owner realised there was money to be made and started changing their minds and its the owner who is now being awkward - as we have not heard from the owner we can only base opinions on the information we have from the OP and should not fabricate possible back stories to justify an outlashing of anger towards the OP (not aimed at you btw just saying in general)
 
Her Instagram page which is linked to her blog stated he went funny on his legs carried her over a jump and collapsed. Within ten mins he had died.

I feel for the OP emotionally, it appeared she loved him a lot.

I feel for the owner both emotionally and financially.

I remain on the side that would feel I would owe owner the value of the horse that id loaned off them.

The definition of loan is very clear and straight forward
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top