Negotiating on price during trial - WWYD?

[Tiffany]

Am I right in thinking you didn't get the horse from the owner but from a third party?

 

[FestiveFuzz]

Aw thanks, kind of you to say. I'm probably a bit more abrupt than many others when buying and selling because I do it more than most so I often can't be bothered with the this and that of it all. Best of luck with your offer, I hope you all end up happy.

Thanks. That's completely understandable. This is my first independent purchase as growing up I usually had hand me downs and my parents always dealt with the sale. Unfortunately that's not so acceptable when you're in your late twenties!

Rest assured that you're NOT a terrible ( potential ) buyer/ owner! People see things from all sorts of different angles - mostly based on their past personal experiences ( as were my comments),It would be a happier world for many horses if a lot of other owners showed as much concern for their horses as you clearly are for one that you do not actually even own! Do hope there's a happy outcome for you both

Aww you're too kind. I'm hopeful it'll all work out ok

Am I right in thinking you didn't get the horse from the owner but from a third party?

Yes someone was selling on behalf of the owner, which makes it all the more complicated.

 

[wench]

Think I would be tempted to get the vet out with his X-ray machine... Check if horse does have ks.

 

[Magicmillbrook]

I would pay agreed price without haggling in return for being given a very generous trial/loan period. I think the only possible wriggle room would be to ask for a nominal amount for the unsuitable saddle taken off.

 

[FestiveFuzz]

I would pay agreed price without haggling in return for being given a very generous trial/loan period. I think the only possible wriggle room would be to ask for a nominal amount for the unsuitable saddle taken off.

The problem is there was no agreed price as such, seller just said "I'd like £X but make me an offer once you get to know him better". Had we agreed a price at the beginning I wouldn't even be asking about negotiating.

 

[Magicmillbrook]

The problem is there was no agreed price as such, seller just said "I'd like £X but make me an offer once you get to know him better". Had we agreed a price at the beginning I wouldn't even be asking about negotiating.

Ahh, I see, that makes things tricky. In that case how about 10% less than what she wanted minus the apparent 'worth' of old saddle

 

[FestiveFuzz]

Ahh, I see, that makes things tricky. In that case how about 10% less than what she wanted minus the apparent 'worth' of old saddle

Yeah that's what I've gone for. Just playing the waiting game now whilst the seller speaks to the owner about it.

 

[smellsofhorse]

Id be vey care with this agreement.
there is another post about a trial going wrong.
they agreen a price before trial now all the hard work is done owner has now decided to up the price massively.

you would be better off agreeing a price now, taking in to account all the thiings the horse needs, physio, tack etc and paying NOW.

Dont wait until you have spent even more money, schooled the horse then find sellers want moore money than originally agreed.

 

[Starbucks]

I think you are lucky they have let you have it on trial for so long!! Do you want the horse or not? IMO you buy a horse, it's then your responsibility to ride it in the appropriate tack.

 

[TarrSteps]

It's interesting how people read things! Most people on this thread seem to view the unusually long trial as a favour the owner did for the potential buyer and as something that should encourage the potential buyer to refrain from any negotiation. To me it could read like the owner is VERY keen to be shot of the horse and willing to go to lengths many owner would not - any trial, let alone an extended one - to encourage a deal. It's quite slick to let someone have a horse for a couple of months as they are likely to get attached and used to behaviours that, if they showed up before or even immediately after purchase, might be deal breakers.

I'll admit that a few times, when the market was bullish, if I had a horse to sell that I had faith in and thought would really suit someone, but the potential purchaser was a bit unsure, I've negotiated a lease period (fee paid, insured, price agreed beforehand etc) with a view to buy. I've never had a horse not live up to or surpass expectations but I suspect even if I had, the potential buyer would have still been quite motivated to go forward with a deal on account of getting attached. It's a bit of a dealer's trick.

I'm not saying this is the case here but if the seller thought they could move the horse quickly and easily and were happy to have the horse back, why did the agree to such a long loan?

I don't think that should necessarily affect asking price - I think people should offer what they are willing to pay and not play games. But it is interesting how many people read this thread as the OP being the "lucky" party in the deal.

 

[Queenbee]

If you got horse and tack on a LWVTB basis, I'd simply cover the cost of physio, buy a new saddle, tell the owner you want to buy the horse but you don't want to buy the saddle. You only agreed to buy the horse if its suitable, likewise you only agreed to buy the saddle if it was suitable. I'd also be negotiating to buy the horse now, just incase the old owner decides at the end of it that she wants the horse back to keep.

 

[MiniMilton]

After such a generous trial period I wouldn't start negotiating on price. In my opinion that would be messing them around.
I would also never buy a horse with tack included, as I would assume the tack is some old rubbish they have lying around in the tack room that they wanted rid of.
I hope it works out for you, it sounds like the horse will have a lovely home if you do buy him.

My friend gave her horse on trial for 3 months (any longer than 2 weeks is too generous). They day they were supposed to hand over the money they suddenly started to try to get the horse for a reduced price. My friend was so angry and disgusted that she collected the horse that day. She wasn't going to entertain that sort if messing around. So the buyers missed out on a nice horse that they knew everything about, all for the sake of a few hundred euro. And they would be lucky to find another seller willing to give such a long trial

 

[FestiveFuzz]

I appreciate with such a long thread it's not always possible to read all the replies before responding so for the benefit of those who haven't read through I'll clarify my answers.

Yes I was stupid to assume that the saddle he came with would be ok until he started fittening up. In my defense he's my first horse in over 4 years and prior to that my parents have always been the ones to deal with buying the horses and they've usually been hand me downs or horses already known to us.

The SELLER offered to deduct the saddle price from the final price. I had already ordered a new saddle and just intended to give the original saddle back to them.

The SELLER was also the one who suggested I make an offer once I'd had him on trial for a while so my initial question was whether I could consider his physio treatments when evaluating what price I offered.

I've never had a horse on trial/lwvtb before and only agreed to it as it was convenient at the time and would have been very difficult to gauge the horses worth when he was being sold out of the field.

Thanks to everyone that has replied to this thread. I really do appreciate the differing opinions on the subject and it's helped enormously with the decision.

 

[harrysmum]

GG2B- you have clarified the situation very well.
My concern however, is that the horse could have underlying issues with his back and , as Wench has said I would really recommend that you have the horses back xrayed as this could be why he was standing in the field. I really hope that this is not the case, as you do seem to be a really caring person who has the horses best interests at heart. Presumably the horses eventual purchase price will be on the condition that he passes a 5 stage vetting? Problems do not always become apparent within a few weeks and often only start to show when the horse is in work. To give the seller the benefit of the doubt, they may not be aware of any problems, but the cynic in me still wonders......
I wouldn't be spending money on new saddles until you are satisfied that his back is OK as obviously, no amount of new saddles will make that right.

 

[TarrSteps]

^ That was kind of in my mind too. Everyone seems to be suggesting the sellers are lovely generous people for giving such a long trial. But maybe they are just crossing their fingers that past issues won't show up or maybe they hoped this would happen, that the OP is attached and accepting behaviour that, if it appeared in a horse on first viewing, would be cause for further investigation if not outright refusal.

I find this fascinating! When anyone buys a horse on here that then shows any sort of issue, there are people queuing to say the buyer has been done. But in this case the OP is contemplating buying a horse with signs of a possible underlying condition without further veterinary investigation and the consensus is she should just pay up.

Personally, I'm with the people urging caution. I know you're attached to the horse but if it does have a physical issue you best know what you're getting into.

 

[FestiveFuzz]

^ That was kind of in my mind too. Everyone seems to be suggesting the sellers are lovely generous people for giving such a long trial. But maybe they are just crossing their fingers that past issues won't show up or maybe they hoped this would happen, that the OP is attached and accepting behaviour that, if it appeared in a horse on first viewing, would be cause for further investigation if not outright refusal.

I find this fascinating! When anyone buys a horse on here that then shows any sort of issue, there are people queuing to say the buyer has been done. But in this case the OP is contemplating buying a horse with signs of a possible underlying condition without further veterinary investigation and the consensus is she should just pay up.

Personally, I'm with the people urging caution. I know you're attached to the horse but if it does have a physical issue you best know what you're getting into.

Thanks Tarrsteps. We've got a re-assessment with the physio soon so hopefully I'll then know if it's something more than a sore back from an ill-fitting saddle. He's improved massively with the groundwork and stretches so I'm hopeful that it's nothing too bad, but if there's any question over what's wrong with him I'll be getting the vet out for a full work up and will be having him 5 stage vetted before purchase now anyway as like you say, I'd rather know what I'm getting into.

 

[Tiffany]

Thanks. That's completely understandable. This is my first independent purchase as growing up I usually had hand me downs and my parents always dealt with the sale. Unfortunately that's not so acceptable when you're in your late twenties!



Aww you're too kind. I'm hopeful it'll all work out ok



Yes someone was selling on behalf of the owner, which makes it all the more complicated.

Can't you talk to the owner she may not be aware of the saddle issue?

 

[dogatemysalad]

But why would the owners give a 6 month loan if they knew or thought the horse had a pre existing condition ? Surely, they'd want to sell without a loan period, or at a push, a very short trial.

6 months is a long time, particularly for a horse that had been doing nothing prior to the loan.

That said, a pre purchase check would be a good idea.

 

[FestiveFuzz]

But why would the owners give a 6 month loan if they knew or thought the horse had a pre existing condition ? Surely, they'd want to sell without a loan period, or at a push, a very short trial.

6 months is a long time, particularly for a horse that had been doing nothing prior to the loan.

That said, a pre purchase check would be a good idea.

I completely agree and genuinely believe if it is anything untoward that they were not aware of it when they advertised him. I don't for one second think the seller is unscrupulously trying to sell me this horse as I know she genuinely cares about his welfare and how we're getting on. But given how little work he's done since being broken I do wonder whether this may be something that has lay dormant and not been picked up as he's been out of work, but only a vet can really answer that.

 

[TarrSteps]

It's very unlikely that the seller knows there is a problem. But yes, I have seen people send horses with known issues out on trial - perhaps they just hope the situation will magically sort itself out, perhaps they just don't think about it. I saw a horse placed on lwvtb last year with a 'small buck in her when she's not been ridden regularly' that turned out to have such severe ks the vet advised pts. The owner has assumed the horse would not return and changed her circumstances so the poor loaner had to deal with the mess.

A far more likely scenario in a horse without much ridden history is that some issue arose during the early riding that was put down to 'normal green horse behaviour', 'being over horsed' or some other such obvious explanation. The owner means to pick the horse up again and sort it out but time goes by and suddenly it's been a year and the real circumstances of the horse ending up in the field in the first place fade.

I'm not saying this IS the case, just that it's hardly unheard of. A seller offering a long trial isn't a guarantee of anything except that the seller wants to sell the horse.

 

[wench]

A physio probably wont be able to help you if the horse has KS.

One of my previous horses had it. Got the physio out who said there was nothing wrong with the horse (that she could find).

After a few months the horse had deteriorated and the physio could find muscular problems with the horse.

I'd save your money on the physio (unless its one that charges £40!); the going rate now seems to be around £75, and get the vet with his xray machine out instead.