Public liablity ins... is it legally required?

HappyHooves

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 December 2009
Messages
652
Visit site
I don't know what insurance a YO has to have by law, but they would be mad not to have some sort of public liability, law or no law. But surely you have your own public liability so if your horse escaped and caused an accident, for example, then your insurance would cover it. Do you mean the sort of insurance whereby you could claim against your yard owner?
 

liveryblues

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 August 2007
Messages
361
Location
dan saff
Visit site
Yes happy hooves, I have public liabilty with my horse insurance. I am on about a serious yard accident ( owner negligent etc) or nasty accident but down to YO, ie faulty equipment etc.
 

martlin

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 December 2008
Messages
7,649
Location
Lincs
www.martlinequestrian.co.uk
Licensed yards need liability.

Licensed by whom?
OP, it's not a legal requirement as far as I know, but it is good practice from YO's point of view. If your YO hasn't got PL insurance and you want to sue, you can still sue, it might be more difficult to recover any money, though and probably no chance of out of court settlement that might be possible if you were effectively suing the insurers.
 

joeanne

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 May 2008
Messages
5,322
Location
Cornwall
Visit site
Just copied and pasted it, but if it were adhered to by the letter, if a YO/YM were to teach from the yard they ought to be licensed by the council, and as such would require public liability:

Some Livery Stables may require a licence to operate a riding establishment if they:
Make any charge for the giving of tuition in riding on horses which do not belong to them.
Make any charge for the use of a horse which does not belong to them for the purpose of riding.

So I guess if you were to livery your horse on a riding school.....again they would need to be licensed.

Very grey area though, with no clear definition.
 

case895

Well-Known Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
3,167
Visit site
Licensed by whom?
OP, it's not a legal requirement as far as I know, but it is good practice from YO's point of view. If your YO hasn't got PL insurance and you want to sue, you can still sue, it might be more difficult to recover any money, though and probably no chance of out of court settlement that might be possible if you were effectively suing the insurers.
I have heard of individual professionals who refuse to have indemnity insurance because they believe that no win no fee lawyers won't take cases against them.
 

Flora

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 February 2013
Messages
268
Visit site
Its not a legal requirement. Im setting up my livery yard and looked into the ins. I had debated whether to have it or not, but after looking at the cost I have decided just to be on the safe side to take it out as it doesn't cost that much.
 

PeterNatt

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 July 2003
Messages
4,531
Location
London and Hertfordshire
s68.photobucket.com
As regards Third Party Public Liability Insurance the owners of a horse should have Third Party Public Liability Insurance to a level of no less than £10,000,000 (Ten Million Pounds) this is as a result of interpretation by the highest court of the land of the Animals act 1971 Section 2 (2) which stated that we as horse owners are liable whether our fault or not. This is as a result of the Mirvahedy v Henley case

A yard owner would be well advised to have insurance. as without it a claim could still be taken against someone but they may loose their personal assets (house and possessions) if the claim was successful.
 

Luci07

Well-Known Member
Joined
13 October 2009
Messages
9,382
Location
Dorking
Visit site
Agree with Peter. My YO researched it and found that if a liveries horse caused an accident, she too could be liable.
 

Goldenstar

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 March 2011
Messages
46,020
Visit site
I have heard of individual professionals who refuse to have indemnity insurance because they believe that no win no fee lawyers won't take cases against them.

That would be mad because it depends that the person seeking redress having neither the personal means or an insurer who is prepared to persue them.
 

moana

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 March 2011
Messages
2,128
Location
Bedlam
Visit site
I would follow Pete Natt's advice, he knows what he is talking about when it comes to this sort of thing. It may not be a legal requirement but your Yard Owner must be out of her mind not to have it.
 

lachlanandmarcus

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 November 2007
Messages
5,762
Location
Cairngorms!
Visit site
Doesn't the BHS 3rd party liability insurance only cover personal leisure riding ? (probably not a livery yard), would need to be a specific commercial policy for that, but not expensive.

NB if you have help on the yard you also need employers liability if you are requiring them at certain times, set hours and providing equipment and directing them. -and the staff should take out their own personal injury insurance.
 

liveryblues

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 August 2007
Messages
361
Location
dan saff
Visit site
Thanks all, I am worried that the yard I am on has no public liability insurance, YO lies about everything so without a valid certificate there is no way of knowing :(
 

Goldenstar

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 March 2011
Messages
46,020
Visit site
Why does it worry you so much ?
I mean it does show an unbuisnesslike attitude but I am just curious.
Does the yard employ any staff ?
 

Rose Folly

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 June 2010
Messages
1,906
Location
North East Somerset
Visit site
Am grateful to Liveryblues for starting this thread. I have 3-5 horses/ponies at livery here. It is more like a family than a true livery yard. My horse has her own insurance; my buildings and the property are covered under our house insurance; I won't have a livery that doesn't have their own public liability insurance. But having read the replies I probably need to take out PL insurance FOR the liveries, even though I am not registered as a yard.

Incidentally, after a recent incident to an acquaintance, I checked with my insurance company as to how I am placed if I allow (as I do) someone else to ride my horse and they were to be involved in an accident. The answer was that if your horse is fully insured, and the rider is riding with your permission, you are covered.

Heigh ho! Off to ring up the insurers......
 

martlin

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 December 2008
Messages
7,649
Location
Lincs
www.martlinequestrian.co.uk
Thanks all, I am worried that the yard I am on has no public liability insurance, YO lies about everything so without a valid certificate there is no way of knowing :(
Why does it worry you so much?
As a YO, I do carry quite a comprehensive cover, but I certainly don't discuss it with my clients. It's not a legal requirement and I don't think it is any of their business, tbh.
 

liveryblues

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 August 2007
Messages
361
Location
dan saff
Visit site
YO is for ever quoting health and safety for stupid things like leaving a broom outside tackroom, them allows people to ride without hats, ride in trainers, she employs a young girl ( who has to handle a very naughty horse) as YO is scared to etc. It is an accident waiting to happen. If the young girl receives life changing injuries who will pay for a lifetimes worth of care?
 

The Fuzzy Furry

Getting old disgracefully
Joined
24 November 2010
Messages
28,454
Location
Pootling around......
Visit site
If the YO is running the concern as a recognised business then the Employers Liability insurance certifice has to be displayed. They do not have to display anything else at all.

That said, when I ran my yard with liveries in, apart from me having my own yard & liability insurance - I insisted that they all had a min level of public liability (eg, via their horse insurance, PC or BHS membership etc) to cover them too.

OP, can I suggest that if you have concerns, you either chat to the YO - or ship out if safety issues are really troublesome?
 

martlin

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 December 2008
Messages
7,649
Location
Lincs
www.martlinequestrian.co.uk
YO is for ever quoting health and safety for stupid things like leaving a broom outside tackroom, them allows people to ride without hats, ride in trainers, she employs a young girl ( who has to handle a very naughty horse) as YO is scared to etc. It is an accident waiting to happen. If the young girl receives life changing injuries who will pay for a lifetimes worth of care?

If the YO employs staff, they need employer's liability insurance, it still has nothing to do with the liveries, though :eek:
As to the other things, I don't think it is my role as a YO to police riding in hats and appropriate footwear on people's own horses, unless I clearly state the rules in contract/yard rules sheet. I can insist that under 16s wear a hat, but other than that, I can only advise.
I get the impression you aren't happy at/with your yard, so maybe it would be prudent to find a place more suited to your needs and requirements?
 

Mike007

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 May 2009
Messages
8,222
Visit site
Why does it worry you so much?
As a YO, I do carry quite a comprehensive cover, but I certainly don't discuss it with my clients. It's not a legal requirement and I don't think it is any of their business, tbh.

It may not be a legal requirement ,but in light of the Mirvahedy case it certainly is your clients business as to whether you are adequately covered .If a horse escapes while in your care and causes an accident the owner is the first person they will claim on but the owner will then claim against you.I would certainly want to know that any yard owner looking after my horse had adequate insurance to cover their liabilities.
 

martlin

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 December 2008
Messages
7,649
Location
Lincs
www.martlinequestrian.co.uk
It may not be a legal requirement ,but in light of the Mirvahedy case it certainly is your clients business as to whether you are adequately covered .If a horse escapes while in your care and causes an accident the owner is the first person they will claim on but the owner will then claim against you.I would certainly want to know that any yard owner looking after my horse had adequate insurance to cover their liabilities.
Oh, I know they can try to recover from me alright, my point is, they can try it whether I do or don't have cover. Maybe I'm secretive or something, but I tend to not discuss my financial affairs with my clients, to straight question ''do you have insurance'' I am happy to answer ''yes'', but that's about it :)
 

Mithras

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 July 2006
Messages
7,116
Location
The Brompton Road
Visit site
As regards Third Party Public Liability Insurance the owners of a horse should have Third Party Public Liability Insurance to a level of no less than £10,000,000 (Ten Million Pounds) this is as a result of interpretation by the highest court of the land of the Animals act 1971 Section 2 (2) which stated that we as horse owners are liable whether our fault or not. This is as a result of the Mirvahedy v Henley case

A yard owner would be well advised to have insurance. as without it a claim could still be taken against someone but they may loose their personal assets (house and possessions) if the claim was successful.

The only legal requirement for a livery yard owner to have public liability insurance is where there are employees who are not members of the family, or where it is a requirement of a local authority licensing scheme.

Peter Natt is describing a potential reparation claim under common law. If the livery yard owner in such a case did not have public liability insurance and were successfully sued, ultimately they would have to either pay the claim out of their personal funds or go bankrupt. Just as in any case where a person were sued and did not have the funds to pay damages. There is no legal requirement to have such third party insurance, as in terms of being required by legislation to do so. It is a good idea, but not compulsory.

Mirvahedy did not change the law but clarified it - the Animals Act 1971 states that there is strict liability (liability without fault) by owners of animals.

I am also puzzled as to the OP's specific concern - if you don't like the set up of your yard and feel unsafe there- then move. You sound like you are trying to catch the YO out - while being safety conscious is good, it also seems that nothing has actually happened in terms of any accident. And keep your own house in order first - make sure YOU have good insurance for your equine activities.
 

Darremi

Well-Known Member
Joined
9 April 2012
Messages
650
Location
Wonderland
Visit site
Oh, I know they can try to recover from me alright, my point is, they can try it whether I do or don't have cover. Maybe I'm secretive or something, but I tend to not discuss my financial affairs with my clients, to straight question ''do you have insurance'' I am happy to answer ''yes'', but that's about it :)

Say the YO is negligent and the claimant's horse escapes, suffering a career ending injury in the process. This is when insurance is key. An uninsured YO is highly unlikely to be able to fully satisfy an award of damages against them, leaving part or most of the loss to fall upon the claimant. I think this is the concern of the OP. Having said that, if the horse is insured itself then the owner might still be able to recover under their policy against the insurance company, and the action against the YO would be subrogated to the insurance company. Insurance is what generally makes people worth suing, so it is naive to dismiss the issue.
 
Last edited:

Goldenstar

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 March 2011
Messages
46,020
Visit site
Actually there is a massive difference between recovering from somebody who is insured and somebody who is not. The claimant is highly unlikely to satisfy their claim against an uninsured defendant. As a previous poster identified, this means that where there is an injury to person or property the claimant will end up bearing some of the cost even where the defendant yard owner was negligent, simply because the defendant has insufficient assets to meet any award against them. So the question of whether the YO is insured or not is very important. Say the YO is negligent and allows the horse to escape, during which the horse suffers a career ending injury, the issue of whether the YO has insurance them becomes vital.

I don't think the example given of a liverys horse escaping and being injured is a public liability issue that would be business insurance , because the damage occurred as a result of the buisness transaction between the the livery and the YOer.
 

martlin

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 December 2008
Messages
7,649
Location
Lincs
www.martlinequestrian.co.uk
Actually there is a massive difference between recovering from somebody who is insured and somebody who is not. The claimant is highly unlikely to satisfy their claim against an uninsured defendant. As a previous poster identified, this means that where there is an injury to person or property the claimant will end up bearing some of the cost even where the defendant yard owner was negligent, simply because the defendant has insufficient assets to meet any award against them. So the question of whether the YO is insured or not is very important. Say the YO is negligent and allows the horse to escape, during which the horse suffers a career ending injury, the issue of whether the YO has insurance them becomes vital.

Yes, it's all very true, but it in somewhat roundabout way answers the OP's question if they can do anything about the YO not having insurance, well, the answer is no, not really, other than voting with their feet :)
And all the talk about recovering any claim becomes even more complicated if the yard is an ltd.
The YO not having insurance might be worrisome to the liveries, but whether it is worrisome to the YO depends on the YO's outlook - they can't take knickers of a bare arse and all that ;)
 

martlin

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 December 2008
Messages
7,649
Location
Lincs
www.martlinequestrian.co.uk
I don't think the example given of a liverys horse escaping and being injured is a public liability issue that would be business insurance , because the damage occurred as a result of the buisness transaction between the the livery and the YOer.

Yes, that would be Care, Control and Custody insurance, I think, not PL.
 

Mithras

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 July 2006
Messages
7,116
Location
The Brompton Road
Visit site
Actually there is a massive difference between recovering from somebody who is insured and somebody who is not. The claimant is highly unlikely to satisfy their claim against an uninsured defendant. As a previous poster identified, this means that where there is an injury to person or property the claimant will end up bearing some of the cost even where the defendant yard owner was negligent, simply because the defendant has insufficient assets to meet any award against them. So the question of whether the YO is insured or not is very important. Say the YO is negligent and allows the horse to escape, during which the horse suffers a career ending injury, the issue of whether the YO has insurance them becomes vital.

Well, it depends on the value of the claim. If it is yard full of valuable competition horses worth tens or hundreds of thousands, then yes, it is advisable. But if it is an average livery yard with horses worth at most a few thousand and many less, then claims may well be satisfied out of the Defendant's own pocket. That is if there is proven liability in the first place.

There is also a concern that "insurance claims" are easily processed by solicitors and insurance companies without there ever being a debate about tortious liability, duty of care, breach of that duty of care, causation and defences ever being discussed - they are simply processed and paid out if there is a reasonable case. This does not mean such a case would succeed in court if challenged. I can't actually recall any cases (ie court decisions) where a livery yard owner has been held liable for career ending injuries to a horse caused by a Yard Owner's negligence - I can imagine evidential requirements would be quite hard to meet - perhaps you can supply me with the citation/s?

Third party liability should the horse escape from the livery yard and for instance cause a road traffic accident is obviously very serious, however I would not argue a point for the livery yard owner having third party insurance before requiring the owner to do so in that instance.
 

Darremi

Well-Known Member
Joined
9 April 2012
Messages
650
Location
Wonderland
Visit site
I don't think the example given of a liverys horse escaping and being injured is a public liability issue that would be business insurance , because the damage occurred as a result of the buisness transaction between the the livery and the YOer.

I never said my example was public liability insurance. Obviously it would be personal liability by the defendant yard owner to the claimant livery. It would only be a public liability issue if the horse injured a third party whilst on its rendezvous.

Mithras - I just finished my four year law degree two weeks ago, I cannot face yet another trawl through Westlaw/Winfield & Wolowicz!! You make a good point re evidential concerns. I was just trying to explain why it might be a good idea for a YO's perspective to have cover for this type of personal liability, and the fundamental idea that a man of straw is not worth suing.
 
Last edited:
Top