Saw this on Facebook...

[Jenko109]

So.

Client sends her horse on sales livery.

The dealer contacts her after a while and tells her that she loves the mare and wants to keep her for herself instead. Gives the client 8k for the horse.

Two days later. Dealer sells the horse on for 11k.

Does the client have grounds for a court case do you think? Normally I would obviously say no, but the nature of the situation with the horse having been on sales livery....

 

[L&M]

Morally a terrible thing to do.

Legally, I imagine no comeback as the horse had been sold.......the new owner, whether a dealer or not, would be entitled to sell it anytime unless a contract had been drawn up to say otherwise.

 

[Cowpony]

An agent must act in the best interests of the client and pass on any offers to the client. So if the dealer had the horse on sales livery, received an offer but didn't pass that on and instead offered to buy the horse with the intention of selling on to the person who made the offer, then yes the agent has acted dishonestly. How you'd prove the order of events without taking it to court is another question entirely.

And of course the difference between £8K in the owner's hand and £11K minus dealer's selling fee may be minimal.

 

[Caol Ila]

There was a similar case in the US that did end up in court. But with very, very high value dressage horses. The sales agent told the horse owner that she sold the horse for $300,000 to a Belgian-based dealer. However, it turned out that the horse did not go to the Belgian dealer. It went to someone else, a former business partner of the agent, for $900,000, and the money was sluiced through the Belgian's account. Someone pocketed $600,000, a lot more than the sales commission on a 300K horse!

The original owner sued the agent for fraud, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and Florida's Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act. They settled but with NDAs.

 

[ycbm]

So.

Client sends her horse on sales livery.

The dealer contacts her after a while and tells her that she loves the mare and wants to keep her for herself instead. Gives the client 8k for the horse.

Two days later. Dealer sells the horse on for 11k.

Does the client have grounds for a court case do you think? Normally I would obviously say no, but the nature of the situation with the horse having been on sales livery....

I would think so, but to be more sure of winning, the client would need to be able to prove that the dealer had an expectation of selling the horse on immediately for more money at the time they bought it.

That could be very difficult, but I think I would be asking for the money and raising a small claim for it if agreement couldn't be reached. A small claim costs very little, risks very little, and at the very least will cause the dealer some aggravation for what was extremely deceitful behaviour even if, at the time of purchase, they really did intend to keep the horse.

I have a horse on sales livery at the moment and stories like this are very disconcerting!
.

 

[Red-1]

There was a similar case in the US that did end up in court. But with very, very high value dressage horses. The sales agent told the horse owner that she sold the horse for $300,000 to a Belgian-based dealer. However, it turned out that the horse did not go to the Belgian dealer. It went to someone else, a former business partner of the agent, for $900,000, and the money was sluiced through the Belgian's account. Someone pocketed $600,000, a lot more than the sales commission on a 300K horse!

The original owner sued the agent for fraud, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and Florida's Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act. They settled but with NDAs.

I think this is naughty as lies were told. However in OP's post, there was no lie, as far as we know. The dealer offered to buy the horse as they liked it. They bought and paid for it. What happens after that is the dealer's business. It may be that they 'liked it' as there was space for a profit.

As long as the deal was struck between 2 consenting adults, a deal is a deal.

If the dealer arranged the deal with the new owner before buying the horse, this may be different but would need proof and a solicitor to help get the words right for best chance of winning..

 

[Red-1]

I think this is naughty as lies were told. However in OP's post, there was no lie, as far as we know. The dealer offered to buy the horse as they liked it. They bought and paid for it. What happens after that is the dealer's business. It may be that they 'liked it' as there was space for a profit.

As long as the deal was struck between 2 consenting adults, a deal is a deal.

If the dealer arranged the deal with the new owner before buying the horse, this may be different but would need proof and a solicitor to help get the words right for best chance of winning..

Looking at it another way... When I was 15, a dealer found me my first horse. I didn't know much about anything, and mum knew even less. The horse was a failed grade B show jumper. In fact, he was stale. I didn't like him from the moment I saw him but the dealer had bought him for me, and pressured mum into buying him whether I liked him or not.

The dealer was a nice person, genuinely thought the horse was suitable, but a few months down the line, she had another in that I liked better, a less well bred Section D X Arab. The dealer looked at my outgoing horse, not hard as I was also a livery, agreed the price to change and put the horse in his stable. I went off to play with my new one, and the old one rolled, got cast, took two walls of the stable out.... and next day was found to have damaged his stifle. He never came sound.

The dealer took on the risk of just that sort of thing happening prior to at the time of the sale being agreed, so I wouldn't blame them if they then found a home for more money and took it.

When I sold my horse last year, someone was interested before we took her competing and advertised. I would have taken 4K less than advertised price, not that I am made of money, but that I was under huge stress at the time, and I didn't need complications. They were not interested in 4K less, said some less than nice things about her, offered 6K less than I planned on advertising her for... I wouldn't sell.

3 weeks later, she had been to 3 BS shows, done double clear BN, clear at Discovery and when we advertised we got the full asking price within 24 hours.

If the yard selling my horse had offered the 4K lower price before we had advertised, I would have jumped at it. I would have expected them to sell in a similar timescale that we did, but I would not have had to bear the risk. If they had sold 2 days later, I would simply have been happy for them, and for me, as I would have agreed a sale...

BTW - said mare is winning anything and everything for the new owner. Out eventing within 5 weeks of purchase. Makes me happy!

 

[Caol Ila]

I guess it depends on the contract the owner signed with the sales agent and whatever laws govern this sort of thing. If there is something similar to the Florida statute about unjust enrichment and unfair and deceptive trade practices, then maybe.

In the case I cited, the plaintiff alleged that the agent told her that it was 'only' (LOL) a $300,000 horse. Then she sold it for 900K. Obviously she did other naughty things as well.

If there's something in writing where the dealer told the client that it was an £8000 horse and then she sold it for £11,000 two days later, then the client may have a case under something like unfair and deceptive trade practices. Especially if it's a professional sales agent and not Joe Bloggs doing the same thing (in which case, it would be a douchebag move, but probably not violating any civil laws), and it isn't like the horse itself jumped up in value in two days' time.

 

[poiuytrewq]

I’ve seen this and haven’t read all the above replies so sorry if someone else has already pointed out. The buyer (not seller) is a known dealer herself and very open about it. If your going to sell a horse to a dealer you really can’t kick up a stink if they then sell it on!

 

[ycbm]

If the agent who currently has my horse told me she loved her so much that she wanted to keep her and bring her on for herself and I found that two days later she had sold the horse for another £3k to someone who I strongly suspected that she had already known would pay the extra, then I would certainly be asking for that money and raising a small claim if I didn't get it.

This all hinges around whether the belief is that the second deal was already agreed before the first one took place. In the timescale of 2 days that has to be a very strong possibility.
.

 

[ycbm]

And of course the difference between £8K in the owner's hand and £11K minus dealer's selling fee may be minimal.

This is true, and will also depend on whether livery was paid for. In my own case, the agent is taking 10% of the selling price if she sells. So an offer of £8000 is worth £8, 888, whereas a sale at £11000 is worth £9900.
.

 

[teddypops]

If the agent who currently has my horse told me she loved her so much that she wanted to keep her and bring her on for herself and I found that two days later she had sold the horse for another £3k to someone who I strongly suspected that she had already known would pay the extra, then I would certainly be asking for that money and raising a small claim if I didn't get it.

This all hinges around whether the belief is that the second deal was already agreed before the first one took place. In the timescale of 2 days that has to be a very strong possibility.
.

That’s what the original owner is claiming has happened and that the deposit had already been paid before the dealer ‘bought’ the horse.

 

[ycbm]

That’s what the original owner is claiming has happened and that the deposit had already been paid before the dealer ‘bought’ the horse.

If that is true it's fraud and if it can be proven then if I was her I would raise a small claim to get the money and if it can't be absolutely proven but she's sure then I would raise a small claim in the hope of winning and the satisfaction of knowing I didn't allow myself to be walked all over and that it might help stop the dealer doing the same thing again.
.

 

[Sossigpoker]

In the UK horses are commodities under law so once you have sold said commodity you have no say in what happens to it. You could sell someone a fridge and 3 days later they sell it on for twice the price. That's just how it is.
The dealer offered to buy the horse, it is none of the previous owner's business what the dealer does with the horse once the agreed sum has been paid.

Unless the dealer with held higher offers from other buyers, I don't see how they've done anything wrong.

 

[Rowreach]

This happened to me. I had a lovely young horse that I produced, hunted, jumped and showed, but he was absolutely huge and at 6 he realised just how much huger than me he actually was.

I sent him to a very well known dealer of hunters and eventers in Surrey, and after a week or so he rang to say this was his idea of a dream horse but he could only afford X, but would keep him for himself. I took the money, and he sold him on a couple of weeks later for four times what he'd given me.

My view was this. I bought a fabulous horse with the money I got, so that was fine. I thought the dealer's behaviour was immoral and dishonourable, and as a result I have, for the past 20 or so years, told everyone who asks that I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him, and I've told them why.

I'll carry on telling people for the next 20 years too.

 

[HufflyPuffly]

Having seen the dealers side, she was honest about her business, seemed to have wanted to keep the mare by registering her with BE and entering events, can show the timeline of her payment and then deposit of new buyer, the horses isn’t actually yet sold as it’s pending vetting and it isn’t even confirmed what the new selling price is.

The previous owner appears to only care about the potential of missing out on extra money and seems to be determined to make a big enough fuss in order to emotionally blackmail money off the dealer ?. She didn’t ‘have’ to accept the offer from the dealer it was her decision.

 

[ycbm]

That changes things.
.

 

[HufflyPuffly]

Quite, the short timeframe looks bad and of course it could be a ruse to have made a quick buck. However, the previous owner sold her un-vetted and willingly to a dealer, once sold she has no claim over the horse or future profit in my view.

The dealer had owned the mare previously hence wanting to keep her this time round but says the perfect buyer appeared two days later and everything is available for the right price ??‍.

 

[meleeka]

I think if there’s proof that the eventual buyer tried the horse before it was sold to the dealer, then the seller should wait until it’s actually sold then start a claim at the courts, because that would be fraudulent. I don’t think in reality they can prove it though, so haven’t really got a leg to stand on.

 

[shortstuff99]

From my reading of it on Facebook I thought she bought it from the sales livery not that she had it on sales livery herself.

 

[fetlock]

It happened to me, a very long time ago, but it still rankles when I think about it.

Sent a horse on sales livery late 80s to a very well known show pony/horse producer/dealer, who we'd actually bought my pony of a lifetime from several years earlier.

She told me he was sold for £2k, sent me the bill less livery and 10% commission etc and the cheque, which was cross checked when you could do that. The price was far less than I'd hoped for but I was cash strapped at the time. She really saw me coming, I admit.

I rang the new owner whose details were on the cheque, only to find out that this person hadn't bought my horse at all - she'd bought a horse trailer for the same price from the dealer.

I then found out from his breeder that he'd actually been sold by that dealer a month or so later, then spoke with the new owners and discovered they'd bought him from the dealer for £5k.

I did speak with a solicitor, who fired off an initial letter but I was too worried about how I'd pay the legal costs at the time to pursue it any further.