New horse declared loss of use due to old injury

well the rules around limb sensitivity are there in the FEI rules, it's not specifically mentioned in BD rulebook nor BS IIRC but it is in the BE one.
However, the scars left from PSD neurectomy are so tiny it would be hard to detect and I think it's widely know that there are lots of horses out competing after they've had the op. I'm not condoning this but it does happen.
I think this is quite different to denerving a hoof FWIW.
 
Lb1996 said:
Our pony would have been unable to compete under be, Bsja and bd rules if he had had the de-Nerving surgery recommended despite if he made full recovery and was able to compete again. I'm sure there are similar cases
Click to expand...

I run a FB group of over 1,500 members for discussion of PSD (proximal suspensory desmitis) focused on hind limb PSD.

It is NOT true you cannot compete a horse that has had hind limb suspensory related neurectomy surgery (there have been some rule changes / clarifications).

Hind limb neurectomy suspensory surgery cuts a very small branch nerve, and it is not detectable it has been done, as there is normal feeling on the outside of the whole of the leg.

Totally different to a large scale neurectomy of a main nerve in the leg to fully denerve leg or foot.

You can legally compete a horse that has had hind limb suspensory related neurectomy surgery BD, BE, BS and Endurance.

And most probably FEI too (the rules say if challenged must be able to demonstrate there is feeling in the leg, and if are non-reactive areas could be disqualified, but because hind limb suspensory related neurectomy is a small internal nerve, it can be assumed would be fine, and not cause outer limb loss of sensation).

OP if your vets are giving you the advice that hind limb suspensory denerving will prevent you from competing the horse, they are WRONG, definitively. It is no longer the case. Whether surgery is the right thing for you and the horse, and whether horse will stand up to future competition is a different question.

Assuming it is hind suspensory neurectomy we are talking about, and assuming you are now in England? Other countries may be different.
 
Lb1996 said:
Our pony would have been unable to compete under be, Bsja and bd rules if he had had the de-Nerving surgery recommended despite if he made full recovery and was able to compete again. I'm sure there are similar cases
Click to expand...

I did not know that, would be interesting to find out how the society would find out though.
 
conniegirl said:
I did not know that, would be interesting to find out how the society would find out though.
Click to expand...

Because in this life there is always some sad person that will be willing to dob on others sad though it is. Makes them feel worthwhile and self important.They are normally the jealous type. sad realy.
 
hopscotch bandit said:
Because in this life there is always some sad person that will be willing to dob on others sad though it is. Makes them feel worthwhile and self important.They are normally the jealous type. sad realy.
Click to expand...

Horses that have been denerved were banned from competing for welfare reasons, if it takes a "sad person" to dob in someone breaking the rules to bring it to the attention of the organisers then so be it, I do agree that there is a difference between denerving the hind suspensories rather than the older and now less common denerving of the feet but the rules were put in place before denerving of the suspensories was an option, times move on so rules change but the welfare of the horse must ALWAYS be the priority.
 
Last edited:
Goldenstar said:
TBH you are where you are .
The pony is insured and seeing if you can get a LOU claim through and moving on with your life may well be the best way forward .
Many experianced people have the ability to feel a horse is not right chuck it out for a while and then move it on after a rest , there may well be no vets records nothing may have been done .
Suspensorys injuries are funny things and can be diffcult to detect horse can work on with them for years it's possible nothing dishonest has gone on .
Click to expand...

This! If you bought from a private seller I would think it would be quite a long difficult road to get "justice". Just put a LOU claim with your insurance and move on. Its frustrating for you and your daughter but it will be even more frustrating to come out of a long legal battle with nothing.
The one I really feel for in all this is the poor pony :(
 
be positive said:
Horses that have been denerved were banned from competing for welfare reasons, if it takes a "sad person" to dob in someone breaking the rules to bring it to the attention of the organisers then so be it, I do agree that there is a difference between denerving the hind suspensories rather than the older and now less common denerving of the feet but the rules were put in place before denerving of the suspensories was an option, times move on so rules change but the welfare of the horse must ALWAYS be the priority.
Click to expand...
Thank you but I was talking about now the FEI rules being changed so that you can legal compete a horse that has had hind limb suspensory related neurectomy surgery which is what one of the above posters mentioned!!
 
Pony is FEI registered. And I'm told can't compete following surgery.
Above all- the poor pony has been sold to me to make money! No consideration for him at all which I find very sad indeed. I have done some digging around and a vet has told me the old owners were getting pain relief drug from a near by vets but couldn't disclose why.
All bloods are now being run and results back next Wednesday.
Thanks fir all your replays
 
They can't do FEI if they have their hocks denerved .
I should think many are taking part who have had the procedure .

OP let's see what Wednesday brings .
If there's drugs in the blood it's going to be very hard .
 
Horse1979 said:
Pony is FEI registered. And I'm told can't compete following surgery.
Above all- the poor pony has been sold to me to make money! No consideration for him at all which I find very sad indeed. I have done some digging around and a vet has told me the old owners were getting pain relief drug from a near by vets but couldn't disclose why.
All bloods are now being run and results back next Wednesday.
Thanks fir all your replays
Click to expand...

i have absolutely no informed advice to give you, I hope you get some sort of redress and the pony get s a happy ending...its just a shame that so many people these days see only pound signs.
 
Op, do you have any correspondance from the seller regarding the ponies health? "never sick or sorry" or such like in the ad? They are not allow to be deceitful so if you have some evidence make sure to save it.

They can of course omit facts if you don't ask very specifically.
 
Could someone on here be 100% clear with regards to LOU in this instance? I don't have the answers and it looks like it could be a gray area. Every time you insure a new horse, as we know, you are asked with regards to pre-existing conditions (and if you have claimed before). So, my question is, what would stop the insurance company just saying - it was a pre-existing, not picked up in a 5 * vetting - and then, how could you prove you DIDN'T know about it. I am not for 1 moment intimidating this is what happened but I wonder how an insurer would view it. Very sorry to read this. I too bought my horse of a lifetime, 5* vetted and 6 months later had a horrendous attack of uvetitis. Subsequent tests meant that my vet thinks there was scarring there before I bought my horse (although hard to see). I have lost out, insurance is maxed out and now I am managing a horse with ERU which is incredibly hard and seems to worsen.
 
Goldenstar said:
No they ought not tell you their contract is with the old owner .
How long had he been in his last home .
Did you ask about what vets treatment he had had in his old home and what was said .
Does your vet think he has had a neurectomy ?
Click to expand...

They won't say without owners permission. Sadly been there done that admittedly with a very much cheaper horse.
I'd ask the vendor for access to vet records. This will either (if they agree) obviously give access or if they say no I'd be definitely thinking they had something to hide.
 
Its terrible that you can buy a horse without being able to see its veterinary record, but if you buy a car privately they are supposed to supply all the service documents etc. Whenever I have bought from a dealer I have always obtained the previous owner's name and managed to contact them by phone to see if the car is a good one or not - they have nothing to lose by telling the truth as it isn't their problem any more.
 
Caracarrie said:
Its terrible that you can buy a horse without being able to see its veterinary record, but if you buy a car privately they are supposed to supply all the service documents etc. Whenever I have bought from a dealer I have always obtained the previous owner's name and managed to contact them by phone to see if the car is a good one or not - they have nothing to lose by telling the truth as it isn't their problem any more.
Click to expand...

It is relatively normal to buy without seeing the veterinary records but there is no reason to buy the horse if you ask for them and the vendor refuses access, in this case it seems that the records were not asked for anyway so not really relevant, buying a horse is so different from buying a car there really is no comparison.
It may become more common for vendors to offer access to veterinary history but many people have no idea they can ask for them whether they are buying or selling.
 
Caracarrie said:
Its terrible that you can buy a horse without being able to see its veterinary record, but if you buy a car privately they are supposed to supply all the service documents etc. Whenever I have bought from a dealer I have always obtained the previous owner's name and managed to contact them by phone to see if the car is a good one or not - they have nothing to lose by telling the truth as it isn't their problem any more.
Click to expand...

It is up to the purchaser to ask to see its veterinary record. If the vendor declines to allow this I think you can draw your own conclusions.

However we are talking of the 'dodgy' horse world (many others too) and many people will have had horses/ponies treated with a different name and/or various veterinary practices, so the record you get given may not show all the story.

I am very sorry for the OP. Maybe the bloods will show something maybe not. At least with a 5 star vetting and insurance they should get something back from someone.
 
Caracarrie said:
Its terrible that you can buy a horse without being able to see its veterinary record, but if you buy a car privately they are supposed to supply all the service documents etc. Whenever I have bought from a dealer I have always obtained the previous owner's name and managed to contact them by phone to see if the car is a good one or not - they have nothing to lose by telling the truth as it isn't their problem any more.
Click to expand...

Its perfectly normal to see cars advertised as "no service history" or "partial Service history" there is no legal requirement to give the service history over. Its very easy to "misplace" an inconvenient service history, just as it is to hide an unfavorable vet history.

I currently have my horse registered at 2 vets. 1 I use for vaccines only as I dont think much of thier knowledge at all but they do very cheap call out and vaccines, the other I use for everything else as I trust them but thier call out is nearly triple that of the other vet and they dont do shared visits.
If I were a dodgy seller (which I'm not, my boy stays with me for the rest of his days) it would be very easy to "forget" to mention the second vet and all that would show on the vet history for the first vet is his annual jabs.
 
Last edited:
Horse1979 said:
Pony is FEI registered. And I'm told can't compete following surgery.
Above all- the poor pony has been sold to me to make money! No consideration for him at all which I find very sad indeed. I have done some digging around and a vet has told me the old owners were getting pain relief drug from a near by vets but couldn't disclose why.
All bloods are now being run and results back next Wednesday.
Thanks fir all your replays
Click to expand...

Good luck, I hope you nail them
 
Horse1979 said:
Pony is FEI registered. And I'm told can't compete following surgery.
Above all- the poor pony has been sold to me to make money! No consideration for him at all which I find very sad indeed. I have done some digging around and a vet has told me the old owners were getting pain relief drug from a near by vets but couldn't disclose why.
All bloods are now being run and results back next Wednesday.
Thanks fir all your replays
Click to expand...

Why has a vet been telling you this? Breach of data protection act, it would also wouldn't stand up in a court of law
 
wench said:
Why has a vet been telling you this? Breach of data protection act, it would also wouldn't stand up in a court of law
Click to expand...

I agree - but it is telling that you got that much out of them. How difficult must it be for a vet to keep quiet if they feel their clients are selling a horse as something it is not!

We had a vet once give us a bit of a funny look about a horse, of course he couldn't say a thing but we decided not to proceed anyway (a few things didn't quite add up) and found out later that the horse was destroyed shortly after for severe navicular.

Not that any of this really helps your case. Personally I don't think trying to take the vendor to court is worth it, but that's a hard pill to swallow when you know they could be doing the same to the next unsuspecting person.

Best of luck with it all OP and keep.us updated.
 
Can you or popsdosh provide link/reference to the rules that cover the BD/BS/BE that means you cannot compete them because this has come up many times and my understanding has been the same as winged horse's.
 
The shame of it is the pony was at such a high level in his discipline that a few people must have known about it. Upon collecting pony from vets they have now said both back legs are severe suspensory damage and would both need operating on to see if it helps before he can be ridden again.
Unsure what the insurance company will say. Also unsure if operating on both is advisable? Yes I was very lucky when the vet said today they had prescribed pain killers ... could be nothing but sounds too coincidental.
 
I don't care if the vet shouldn't tell me this the fact they did confirms they are awful people. I doubt I will take it to court but at least I can name and shame then
 
In a lot of ways, given the price of the pony it seems odd that they didn't decide to go ahead with the operation themselves, as any sort of painkiller if used was always going to wear off and potentially come back and bite them on the bum.
 
How did you vet know the old owners were getting pain killers when they are in Ireland and using Irish vets? Did they ring and ask, just curious
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top