Problems with dealer in Sussex

W

WizPopBang14.2

New User
Joined
3 March 2012
Messages
2
Visit site
We are having a big issue with a certain dealer in Sussex and wondered if anyone else has had the same problem. We bought a 16hh mare for our 15 year daughter from him and had tried her out several times at his yard, had her 5 stage vetted and collected her. Within 6 days we contacted the dealer to say we wanted to return her and get a full refund because she had reared up and bucked my daughter off on several occasions for no apparent reason in the first 4 days. By this time my daughter was losing confidence in her new horse and was nervous to ride her. The dealer originally said he refused to take her back and was certainly not going to refund our money. He was insisting on us keeping her in livery (at our expense) until he had found a suitable replacement. This goes against everything he said when we went to his yard and tried out a couple of horses. We are now 3 weeks down the line and he refuses any contact (despite numerous e-mails, calls and even a letter sent recorded delivery) and now we are being forced to take legal action in the small claims court. Anyone else with similar experiences, advice would be appreciated! :confused: Thanks.
 
The dealer verbally told us on more than one occasion if there was any problem with her even up to six months later he would have her STRAIGHT back. When we collected her he said he would put the warranty in the post and despite numerous texts, phone calls, etc to remind him this warranty never appeared. So despite verbally telling us his warranty terms we did not actually have anything in writing from him for the warranty. He appeared very concerned about his reputation and assured us there would not be a problem in returning any problem horse to him. All we have is a written receipt and many e-mails etc. Thanks for reply.
 
WizPopBang14.2 said:
The dealer verbally told us on more than one occasion if there was any problem with her even up to six months later he would have her STRAIGHT back. When we collected her he said he would put the warranty in the post and despite numerous texts, phone calls, etc to remind him this warranty never appeared. So despite verbally telling us his warranty terms we did not actually have anything in writing from him for the warranty. He appeared very concerned about his reputation and assured us there would not be a problem in returning any problem horse to him. All we have is a written receipt and many e-mails etc. Thanks for reply.
Click to expand...

Honestly, without anything written down you've not a hope in hell. What do the emails entail? At the very least, he's offering you a replacement, which is more than most will do for you. If that's the option over having a horse your daughter can't ride, take it. If he was that un-bothered he'd tell you to get on with it, surely?

Did you try her out? How many times? Was she fine then? For all you know he might well have had no problems with her, or not known of any. On the other hand he might have lied through his teeth, you just don't know.

4 days is a short space of time, in 4 days I would feel it perfectly normal for a horse to have some problems adjusting and act out of character.
 
SophieLouBee said:
Honestly, without anything written down you've not a hope in hell. What do the emails entail? At the very least, he's offering you a replacement, which is more than most will do for you. If that's the option over having a horse your daughter can't ride, take it. If he was that un-bothered he'd tell you to get on with it, surely?

Did you try her out? How many times? Was she fine then? For all you know he might well have had no problems with her, or not known of any. On the other hand he might have lied through his teeth, you just don't know.

4 days is a short space of time, in 4 days I would feel it perfectly normal for a horse to have some problems adjusting and act out of character.
Click to expand...

I would also expect some teething problems, but OP states that the horse has reared, and bucked daughter off several times - I wouldn't quite expect that. Horses are taken to different environments when they go to shows, but they don't all rear and buck their riders off (some do, I agree!).
OP - have you had anyone else ride the horse since you got it home? It might be an idea to get a competent rider, or even instructor on the horse to see if it does the same with them....
 
SophieLouBee said:
Honestly, without anything written down you've not a hope in hell. .
Click to expand...

I don't think this is true, this is a dealer that we are talking about, therefore the sale of goods act applies and there is an obligation for the gooods to be fit for purpose.

SophieLouBee said:
Did you try her out? How many times? Was she fine then? For all you know he might well have had no problems with her, or not known of any. On the other hand he might have lied through his teeth, you just don't know..
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter whether he had no problems or even believed there to be no problems,the point is there is now a problem. As he is trading in horses the law will determine that he should be aware of any problems.

SophieLouBee said:
4 days is a short space of time, in 4 days I would feel it perfectly normal for a horse to have some problems adjusting and act out of character.
Click to expand...

Possibly but it is now 3 weeks down the line and they are still having problems. I believe a dealer of repute would have gone out to witness the problems for them self. Then if the problem was with the horse offered to reschool it, exchange it or give the money back. Not ignore them.
 
Lizzie66 said:
I don't think this is true, this is a dealer that we are talking about, therefore the sale of goods act applies and there is an obligation for the gooods to be fit for purpose.

Yes, but who says the goods aren't fit for purpose, we don't know if there is an underlying cause to the behaviour as of yet

Doesn't matter whether he had no problems or even believed there to be no problems,the point is there is now a problem. As he is trading in horses the law will determine that he should be aware of any problems.

Yes, he has been made aware of problems, and as a warranty/contract hadn't been signed, has offered a resolution, which in turn he could present to small claims or whoevers


Possibly but it is now 3 weeks down the line and they are still having problems. I believe a dealer of repute would have gone out to witness the problems for them self. Then if the problem was with the horse offered to reschool it, exchange it or give the money back. Not ignore them.

He did offer to exchange it?
Click to expand...

Lol, I sound as if I am siding with the dealer now don't I. He could be a total scumbag for all we know, but I don't like to judge on what very little info has been provided. These are just my opinions, not facts. I have no idea about how seriously small claims take these things, or how worth it it would be for the costs vs the cost of the horse.

I think there are questions that need to be answered by the OP before we all jump on the bandwagon.

Some dealers will have horses back, some won't, I don't think that is enough info to say weather they are 'reputable' or not, it's just the way they run their business.
 
SophieLouBee said:
Some dealers will have horses back, some won't, I don't think that is enough info to say weather they are 'reputable' or not, it's just the way they run their business.
Click to expand...

Every dealer is required by law to take back the horse if it is unfit for purpose, whether the behaviour is characteristic of the horse when they had it or not. And a bucking rearing horse, (even with an ill fitting saddle), is not fit for purpose for a 15 year old child.

I believe that the only exception to this is a horse sold by a dealer acting as an agent, which they do not own. Then the dispute has to be with the owner, not the agent.

Dealers who won't take the horse back are breaking the law and by definition disreputable.

The warranty is valid even though it was verbal. It does not have to be written to form a contract.
 
Last edited:
cptrayes said:
Every dealer is required by law to take back the horse if it is unfit for purpose, whether the behaviour is characteristic of the horse when they had it or not. And a bucking rearing horse, (even with an ill fitting saddle), is not fit for purpose for a 15 year old child.

Dealers who won't take the horse back are breaking the law.
Click to expand...

Really, I never knew that? I think that's quite a bizzare law. So if a horse is in pain, or the new owner has done something to make the horse 'un-fit for purpose', then the dealer is still held responsible for that? When in actual fact it had nothing to do with them, and that could be proven? I.e, the owner has, as you theoretically said, ridden the horse in ill fitting tack, causing a reaction to pain, then the dealer is still responsible for the horse being unfit for purpose, even after a qualified expert has been out and confirmed the tack is ill fitting?

(THE ABOVE IS NOT RELATED WHATSOEVER TO THE OP, IT'S A THEORETICAL SCENARIO, I'm sure the OP is a loving, caring horse owner :) )

Interesting cptrayes, you are a bounty of knowledge :D
 
I've also lost some money to a dealer in Sussex after the horse failed it's vetting. Admittedly it was only the deposit, but it's still a lot of money for me anyway. Would be interesting if they were the same dealer.

After joining the forum and reading up on them it turns out they have an appalling reputation.

Might be a different dealer, but the one I went to shared it's name with a well known travel agent and were based around lewes way.

Pm me if you prefer :)
 
Last edited:
SophieLouBee said:
Really, I never knew that? I think that's quite a bizzare law. So if a horse is in pain, or the new owner has done something to make the horse 'un-fit for purpose', then the dealer is still held responsible for that? When in actual fact it had nothing to do with them, and that could be proven? I.e, the owner has, as you theoretically said, ridden the horse in ill fitting tack, causing a reaction to pain, then the dealer is still responsible for the horse being unfit for purpose, even after a qualified expert has been out and confirmed the tack is ill fitting?

(THE ABOVE IS NOT RELATED WHATSOEVER TO THE OP, IT'S A THEORETICAL SCENARIO, I'm sure the OP is a loving, caring horse owner :) )

Interesting cptrayes, you are a bounty of knowledge :D
Click to expand...

Personally I would not consider that any horse that explodes because it's in a saddle that does not quite fit right is fit for purpose for a 15 year old girl. Most horses would not behave in that extreme way even in a badly ill fitting saddle and one that does is not suitable for a child. The dealer would be responsible for that, yes. I am indeed a bounty of knowledge, I'm so glad you recognise it :D
 
As others have said on here, as you have bought the horse from a dealer, you are covered under the Sale of Goods Act. If the dealer told you the horse was suitable for the purposes that you wanted to use the horse for - even if this was only verbal and not written - then I'm pretty sure you have a case to return the horse and get your money back.
 
SophieLouBee said:
Really, I never knew that? I think that's quite a bizzare law. So if a horse is in pain, or the new owner has done something to make the horse 'un-fit for purpose', then the dealer is still held responsible for that? When in actual fact it had nothing to do with them, and that could be proven? I.e, the owner has, as you theoretically said, ridden the horse in ill fitting tack, causing a reaction to pain, then the dealer is still responsible for the horse being unfit for purpose, even after a qualified expert has been out and confirmed the tack is ill fitting?
Click to expand...

If the horses behaviour is solely down to an action of the buyer then the seller would have a defence, but they would have to prove this not the other way round. As the seller hasn't bothered to go and see then they can not be relying on this.

Also it would have to be a positive act on behalf of the buyer, as in knowingly using ill fitting tack when the seller has warned them that the horse might be sensitive to an issue such as this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top