Selling horses & disclosing info

[H-J]

Where do you stand if you sell a horse without disclosing information of an old ‘significant’ injury?

I’m not doing this by the way! But speaking hypothetically if I sold Spider without disclosing any information of her hind suspensory injury, if the purchasers then found out I hadn’t told them would that be a problem?

Sorry if I am talking in riddles! Any answers appreciated

 

[MissDeMeena]

Depends, I would tell them, just for the well being of the horse
ie you could be selling it as a broodmare, but they might be thinking they could event it in a few months/years time, but if they knew about the injury they may think differently!!
I think telling the truth is the best bet when selling horses, otherwise something may come back and bite you!

 

[Tempi]

i would defiantely tell the truth about any old injuries, especially something like that - purely for the wellbeing of the horse more than anything else.

 

[bennsboy]

If you purchaesd a horse and then found out something significant hadn't been disclosed how would you feel? Do unto others ......

 

[H-J]

[ QUOTE ]
Depends, I would tell them, just for the well being of the horse
ie you could be selling it as a broodmare, but they might be thinking they could event it in a few months/years time, but if they knew about the injury they may think differently!!
I think telling the truth is the best bet when selling horses, otherwise something may come back and bite you!

[/ QUOTE ]

Im not selling Spider! I just wondered what happens in those situations.

If you then find out a horse has had an injury and the seller didnt say, can you do anything?

Just always thought you 'had' to disclose all

 

[MissDeMeena]

Well then i guess you can tell the buyer whatever the hell you like, but that all depends on what sort of person you are

 

[H-J]

[ QUOTE ]
i would defiantely tell the truth about any old injuries, especially something like that - purely for the wellbeing of the horse more than anything else.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry maybe I didnt explain myself!

It isnt that injury just injuries in general, just using Spider as an example

 

[AmyMay]

The vet should ask that very question at the vetting.....

As should any potential purchaser. So whilst morally yes it would be good to say something - you're not bound to. Unless the question is asked by either the vet or the potential purchaser, then you should be honest and tell them.

 

[SpottedCat]

As far as I am aware, it is buyer beware - so if you ask a direct question and they lie (and you can prove it - i.e.have independant witnesses or have it in writing) then you *may* have some recourse depending on how soon after purchase it is picked up. If you don't ask, then they don't have to tell you.

I guess there may be some recourse if it was 5 stage vetted and another independant vet is prepared to verify the age of the injury predated the vetting and should have been picked up in the vetting.

But all that is so much 'if and but' and will likely cost you a fortune without any guaranteed outcome as it is so hard to prove. So I doubt there is any comeback - even less so if you bought privately rather than through a dealer.

 

[Halfstep]

Technically, if the buyer ASKS, you have to tell, but you don't have to disclose voluntarily. However, I would. Especially with such a significant injury. It would be unethical not to. But that is why you should always ask detailed questions about the horses' medical history when you are purchasing.

 

[H-J]

[ QUOTE ]
Well then i guess you can tell the buyer whatever the hell you like, but that all depends on what sort of person you are

[/ QUOTE ]

True!

Just always thought it was illegal! And people had to disclose, but know of a few cases where people hadnt.

 

[Alibear]

Zips on suit of armour.

Make sure they have it vetted and let that be.

Why? Because you will read on here about how everyone tells the truth and you always should do full disclosure etc etc.
But in the real world that never happens.

I believe that if they don't ask then you are OK. So if they say has she had any previous injuries/illnesses then you have to tell them but if they don't ask you don't have to volunteer the information.

Note to add I have in fact sold on 3 horses all with full disclosure of their problems and all sold for very little.

 

[Tempi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i would defiantely tell the truth about any old injuries, especially something like that - purely for the wellbeing of the horse more than anything else.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry maybe I didnt explain myself!

It isnt that injury just injuries in general, just using Spider as an example

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah i see, got the wrong end of the stick!!

 

[KatB]

Depends if the injury is still an injury

 

[H-J]

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I am aware, it is buyer beware - so if you ask a direct question and they lie (and you can prove it - i.e.have independant witnesses or have it in writing) then you *may* have some recourse depending on how soon after purchase it is picked up. If you don't ask, then they don't have to tell you.

I guess there may be some recourse if it was 5 stage vetted and another independant vet is prepared to verify the age of the injury predated the vetting and should have been picked up in the vetting.

But all that is so much 'if and but' and will likely cost you a fortune without any guaranteed outcome as it is so hard to prove. So I doubt there is any comeback - even less so if you bought privately rather than through a dealer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its a shame thats how it is

 

[H-J]

[ QUOTE ]
Depends if the injury is still an injury

[/ QUOTE ]

True, but then I spose if there was lameness or something you would think people would see that!

 

[KatB]

Exactly, that would still be an injury then!!!

 

[kick_On]

speaking for experience i wasn't told about previous injury/ treatment even though asked all right questions and had 5*star vetting etc i was very very careful BUT.Then horse when wrong and was out for nearly year i was mad as a hatter and the experience did leave me very bitter and twisted. So personnel i couldn't sell horse without FULL history - warts and all

 

[_jetset_]

I started to think about this when Grace came out of everything on the other side... there are no scars to see, even to a professional eye (ie. a vet) as they were never really present at the time.

What I believe should happen (I do not know whether this does or not) is that that vet doing the vetting should be able to liase with the horse's vet and read any veterinary notes on the horse. That way, they would be more knowledgable about that particular horse.

 

[Zebedee]

[ QUOTE ]
Where do you stand if you sell a horse without disclosing information of an old ‘significant’ injury?

Sorry if I am talking in riddles! Any answers appreciated

[/ QUOTE ]

I had to provide a statement to the courts a few years ago on behalf of a friend who had brought a horse that wasn't as it had been described. The situation then (as far as I can remember) was as follows.
There is some 'duty of care' involved. For instance if you had a horse that was prone to bucking fits or who wasn't 100% in traffic & you didn't inform prospective purchasers you could be held liable if there was an accident. With regard to a known weakness such as an old injury which is no longer visable I don't think that there would be any comeback to a private seller, especially if the horse then passes a vetting. However if you were asked a direct question about the horses veterinary history & you then lied that would be classed as misrepresentation. Warrenties given that horses are sound when they are being sold at auction are generally only good for about 48hrs, & are really there to give purchasers the chance to have the animal vetted.
Purchasers actually have far more protection when buying from a dealer than from a private purchaser. The sale of goods acts which states that items should be fit for the purpose for which they've been sold does apply to dealers, but not to private sellers, hence the 'caveat emptor' (buyer beware) being applicable.

So the short answer (as far as I know) to your question is no, you don't have to voluntarily disclose anything you think may prejudice the sale, but withholding information regarding behavioral problems, or failing to answer direct questions honestly could leave you liable.
If you asked the question as to whether you should disclose the information on both moral & horse welfare grounds however the answer would be totally different.

 

[Cruiseonamiro]

I have to say - If they ask a direct question, give them a direct answer, but don't volunteer any information that could stop you selling the horse, especially if said injury no longer causes the horse a problem and isn't likely to be re-occuring. Until recently I thought "sold as seen" pretty much covered it.

 

[BBH]

To me its a no brainer, I would treat people how I would expect to be treated and that means full disclosure of whatever problems be they behavioral or medical .

There are too many unscrupulous people in the horse industry and I for one wouldn't add to them.

 

[DollyPentreath]

I would disclose information regarding injury, if the old injury has not caused any problems for some time I would try to reassure a buyer of this.

However, I find behavioural issues more interesting;

[ QUOTE ]
For instance if you had a horse that was prone to bucking fits

[/ QUOTE ]

My young eventer occasionally bucks, maybe twice a month if he's had a day off going for a canter or something. They're not malicious but quite large. Although I don't find them a problem at all he has got someone off in the past by unbalancing the rider and then frightening himself. As an eventer he's not really a novice ride so I'd expect him to be going to a competition home. On the whole he's very safe and an experienced hunter, but should this type of behaviour be disclosed to a buyer?? All horses have the potential to buck after all..

 

[SpruceRI]

[ I don't think that there would be any comeback to a private seller, especially if the horse then passes a vetting.

Purchasers actually have far more protection when buying from a dealer than from a private purchaser. The sale of goods acts which states that items should be fit for the purpose for which they've been sold does apply to dealers, but not to private sellers, hence the 'caveat emptor' (buyer beware) being applicable.


Slightly changing tack here, but the Sale Of Goods Act is bypassed by a lot of unscrupulous people who claim they're not dealers when they most certainly are.

Does anyone know whether the Small Claims Court can/will prove if a person is a Dealer or not?

As a friend could certainly do with help on this one having bought from a dealer whose claiming not to be.

 

[SpottedCat]

Shaab - it's one of those grey areas IMO. I guess if I was asked I'd tell the truth - yes he has bucked on occasion, he's a fit competition horse, if I wasn't asked I wouldn't class it as a major behavioural issue because you're not selling him as a bombproof horse, you're selling as a competition horse. If he bucked repeatedly every time you got on him then yes, I'd say that should be disclosed.

Disclosing it won't put the right people off either - I knew B wasn't brilliant in traffic, could be dodgy to load and didn't travel well, but I wasn't bothered about the first issue, and reckoned I could (and have) fix the second and third.

 

[chestnut cob]

Agree with PB. Also I would ask to see the certificate of insurance when I went to look at the horse, if the owner had it insured. The insurance co would list anything that was excluded - so if the horse had done a suspensory, that would be excluded so listed on there.

 

[DollyPentreath]

Thanks SC, I think that's what I'd do in the situation too. Chestnut Cob, I have never thought about looking at an insurance cert, what a good idea.

 

[pennyh]

on the last 2 vettings i have experienced the vet (different ones/practices) asked the seller in both cases if the horse had had any injuries , medical conditions , vices or behavioural issues

 

[Zebedee]

[ QUOTE ]

However, I find behavioural issues more interesting;

[ QUOTE ]
For instance if you had a horse that was prone to bucking fits

[/ QUOTE ]

My young eventer occasionally bucks, maybe twice a month if he's had a day off going for a canter or something. They're not malicious but quite large. Although I don't find them a problem at all he has got someone off in the past by unbalancing the rider and then frightening himself. As an eventer he's not really a novice ride so I'd expect him to be going to a competition home. On the whole he's very safe and an experienced hunter, but should this type of behaviour be disclosed to a buyer?? All horses have the potential to buck after all..

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't have thought so no. That is normal & natural behavior for a young well bred, competition fit horse. If you were to try & claim 'never been known to buck' that then of course would be misrepresentation. I was more referring to the kind of unpredictable broncing that the occassional horse treats us to!! If in your experience of the animal it has never done anything untoward, & when it gets to it's new home it learns all sorts of new tricks you can't be held responsible for it's altered mode of behavior.
It is all a bit of minefield really, but the average honest private seller with nothing to hide really shouldn't have anything to worry about.
The other suggestion I would have for anyone selling a horse is that if you really don't think the person who wants to buy it isn't the right one for that animal then don't sell to them unless you really really have no other option.

 

[jellybaby]

Legally I don't think you have a leg to stand on - under the rules of contract law, offer, acceptance, intention to create legal relationship etc. Its classic 'Buyer Beware' if the horse was vetted, you may have some comeback on the vet; but if they are decent vets they will be 'disclaimered' up to the hill, so legally you probably wont have a way in there either.

Still, I may be totally wrong, but thats my initial reaction...

JB xx