Now would you consider this unreasonable??

Santa_Claus

Santa_Claus

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 November 2001
Messages
22,282
Location
Wiltshire/Hampshire ish!
www.katiemortimore.com
Personally I would be fuming but interested to hear other's opinions.

Friend has 4yo who is currently on full livery being backed and bought on for her as she too busy with work to be able to put the time in required at this stage in horse's training.

Said horse was only a month ago being called dangerous to be handled from the ground and on occasion had to be led in by two people in a bridle...

Said horse has improved greatly and has been near foot perfect through backing process.

Now to the question. Yard searching for new groom who will be fully involved in backing horses as that a big part of yard income. YO decides to have interviewees to ride above horse, without firstly assessing their riding on an older horse and most importantly without asking owner's permission.

Now if this had been me I would have me I would have been dumbfounded and in total shock but would then have kicked up big style, especially as a friend had her 'older reliable' horse used without her permission to be ridden out by a new groom at a different yard. Horse spooked and bolted on road and rider bailed ship breaking ankle on landing. friend didn't even find out about incident until 3 years later when the groom sued her and WON, the yard and her were found jointly liable.

So would you be fuming if your newly backed 4yo was used as a 'test ride' for new grooms without your permission when the potential grooms' riding ability was unknown?!?!
 
How does your friend know that they are using her horse for interviewees?

If they told her then it as if she is agreeing to this happening?

She should put it in writing that under no circumstances are unknown riders to ride her horse until ability proven and any accidents that happen while they are breaking and schooling her horse will not be covered by her? Also any accidents that befall the horse while in their care is down to them and their insurance.

A friend of mine sent her horse to be broken in and while there they fed him too soon after excercise and he got a blocked tube in the gut. Had to have op never recovered properly and died he was only 4. She was obviously devestated and she ended up with a vet bill of over £6000 which the yard would not pay.
 
friend found out today after all interviews had taken place. Friend has now made it VERY clear to YO that only current groom and YO can ride horse and her extreme shock that YO thought it appropriate to use horse without her permission. If she would have been able horse would have been off yard today but for reasons which I wont go into she can't just move horse immediately. She is actually looking into contract which she signed when bringing horse on to yard as she 'thought' it restricted who could ride her horse. YO though has been previously known to change rules to suit them just didn't think they would have ever done something like this which is just plain dangerous in my opinion
 
i wonder if the interviewees were aware that they were riding a horse that was `dangerous` a month ago?????

not good,whichever way you look at it.
frown.gif
 
I really don't think words would describe how mad I would be!
Is there anything she can do to, such as taking the YO to court? And get them to pay what she had to pay the groom?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Give the liability issues, I wouldn't expect anybody to ride my horses that I hadn't preapproved.

[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely agree!
 
I would be furious and chances are I would also remove the horse from the yard and try and get someone else to work on it. If you can't trust the YO with something like this goodness knows what else they are doing behind your back.
 
[ QUOTE ]
If anything had happened to the interviewees I would think the YO would be found liable of negligence.
I wouldn't be sending her any more horses...

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately as mentioned another friend found this not to be the case when it came to a court of law. Her 'reliable older' horse was used without her permission for a new groom (on 2 week trial i believe). The horse bolted (supposebly although never previously bolted) and the rider decided to jump off (wasn't unseated) on to the road breaking her ankle. Friend never found out about the incident until over 3 years later when the by then very ex groom decided to sue. Friend had best barristers and lawyers for the case as her insurance company were tempted to take it all the way up courts to make it a precedent case but decided otherwise in the end. She was found jointly liable with the YO as she was the owner of the horse and an earlier case has stated that a horse owner is strictly liable for any damage caused by the horse whether or not that had acted knowingly or negligently or in this case not at all. The worst thing was her horse was 'assessed' by some professional riders for the case who all stated they didn't believe the horse would have bolted etc but court still found against her. Said horse in the end had to go through a sancturary to become a companion as the insurance company even given the evidence in her favour would not insure him. friend has now given up riding primarily because of the incident
frown.gif
frown.gif


Back to friend concerned with youngster, she reacted very strongly and was off to talk to YO after I saw her yesterday evening. I may not have all the information and I seriously hope there is an innocent explanation i.e. they had already been on another horse (although distinct impression given was they hadn't) and all they did on youngster was lean over etc but still doesn't excuse the fact her permission wasn't asked. No doubt will find out more tonight....
 
From what you hae stated, yes I'd be furious, but do you only have your friends's side of the story? Maybe there is more to it than that. Maybe there were only two interviewees and maybe they both had refs from other professionals they had ridden for. Also some aspect of training horses can involve seeing how the horses react to different riders, as a kind of de-sensitising. I agree with you on principle, I'm just trying to say the trainer may have not seen things from the same angle.
 
I would be angry but I wouldn't move the horse as it sounds like it has made good progress there. I would have it put in writing that no one apart from employees of YO could ride the horse though.
 
I would do one of these things.
1) I wouldn't be able to trust said YO and I would move the horse to continue its back and bringing on elsewhere, I would be just so paranoid that the said yard owner would just keep putting people on it, what if someone had been injured from the youngster? Its not the horses fault that its being bombarded by riders!
2) I would draw up a contract with the yard owner, get it signed and keep a copy saying that only the YO and Current groom are to ride the youngster. That way, if someone else gets on the horse and is injured, your friends back is covered legally as she has made very clear who she wants the horse to be ridden by and YO would be in breach of contract if someone else rode the horse.
 
I would be fuming, and having strong word and debating paying the bill.



Out of interest which yard?
Feel free to PM me if you like, although i think public name and shame may be more appropriate in the circumstances!!
 
I would go NUCKING FUTS! I would feel very let down and betrayed.
Thats why I broke Bear in with a friend who does it for a living. She came out once a week and showed me what to do and I'd carry it on for the following week and so on... Bear was done start to finish in 4 weeks!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top