Sharers v Riding Schools

[southerncomfort]

At some point riders graduate from a weekly lesson at a RS and buy their own horse. What difference does it make if they are sharing a horse instead instead of owning one?

Besides which almost all the people I know who share or loan still have lessons albeit they might have an instructor come to them instead of going to a RS, but again isn't that what most people who buy a horse do anyway?

Assuming the post is aimed at leisure riders, then I feel they're inventing a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[Wishfilly]

Interesting. I don't know enough about it (i.e., if agreement is with owner or the yard, it's a full livery yard I think). I assumed insurance and things would come under them being a business already as a livery yard but perhaps not depending on the set up they have. It did sound good for that transition as you say. It wasn't for me though as it wasn't cheap and I was/am looking for just a day or two per week.

The rules are different if you're hiring out horses compared to running a livery yard- the standards for welfare and safety are higher. If it's all above board, and the agreement is with the owner, and they're not making any money out of it, then that's fine. But if it's one owner with lots of horses and their own yard, then it's not legal, unless they are licenced properly for hiring out horses.

They might be legit.

I hope you are able to find something that suits, though!

 

[SaddlePsych'D]

The rules are different if you're hiring out horses compared to running a livery yard- the standards for welfare and safety are higher. If it's all above board, and the agreement is with the owner, and they're not making any money out of it, then that's fine. But if it's one owner with lots of horses and their own yard, then it's not legal, unless they are licenced properly for hiring out horses.

They might be legit.

I hope you are able to find something that suits, though!

It could be. I am fairly sure these are actually full livery clients' horses, it's just they seem to be doing the advertising on behalf of and appear to have standardised the share agreements across the whole yard.

I am giving up my search for now. Just about to end a trial for one as it's not going to be right for me, and not had much luck finding something suitable. Am going to try going RS helper/volunteer route instead for something a bit different.

 

[teapot]

Again I know people involved - not pammy but I'm on first name terms with others and I know this isnt a well intended badly worded post. The intent is all sharers.
Im very pro riding school and have been lucky enough to work and train at and with some of the best.
It's not bad wording it's badly intended and I'm very concerned that this will back fire and be divisive at a time when we need to be united as equestrians

I also know people who have said differently (and they work directly with both named schools on this thread) so... I'll remain open-minded. I'm also not sure one Facebook post will divide and conquer the entire equestrian industry. It's not been shared that much, nor commented on much compared to others.

It'll be forgotten in a few days time, in favour of another quest no doubt. They were stirring about rugging and clipping the other week!

 

[Wishfilly]

It could be. I am fairly sure these are actually full livery clients' horses, it's just they seem to be doing the advertising on behalf of and appear to have standardised the share agreements across the whole yard.

I am giving up my search for now. Just about to end a trial for one as it's not going to be right for me, and not had much luck finding something suitable. Am going to try going RS helper/volunteer route instead for something a bit different.

That's a real shame- that you're not able to find something suitable. I hope volunteering works out!

In the situation you describe, I'd want to meet the horses owner directly at least- but I'm very cynical!

 

[Abacus]

The guidance for trading threshold is misleading. Many people think the 1k threshold is for the amount made by the activity. it is actually the total threshold of ALL your income.
.

Presumably this is income after cost of keeping the pony (which you allude to)? In this case I would think anyone offering this arrangement would arrange their accounts so that the price of the ‘share’ covers but doesn’t exceed the cost of that particular pony so that they don’t appear to make income (profit). So from a taxation perspective it’s probably a pointless debate.

 

[Wishfilly]

At some point riders graduate from a weekly lesson at a RS and buy their own horse. What difference does it make if they are sharing a horse instead instead of owning one?

Besides which almost all the people I know who share or loan still have lessons albeit they might have an instructor come to them instead of going to a RS, but again isn't that what most people who buy a horse do anyway?

Assuming the post is aimed at leisure riders, then I feel they're inventing a problem that doesn't exist.

I think sharing is a really good transition from RS to owning, but I suppose the feeling is that a) the owners might not be able to afford their horses without sharers and b) the sharers can't afford/don't want their own, thus more potential clients for the riding school?

There are genuine issues with ex-riding schools/ owners with several horses/ponies hiring horses and making money out of it, but billing it as a share to avoid licencing regs, which is a problem from a welfare and safety PoV.

 

[Roxylola]

It'll be forgotten in a few days time, in favour of another quest no doubt. They were stirring about rugging and clipping the other week!

i hope so, i like pammy's forthrightness but she's taken a beating this week

 

[AdorableAlice]

Presumably this is income after cost of keeping the pony (which you allude to)? In this case I would think anyone offering this arrangement would arrange their accounts so that the price of the ‘share’ covers but doesn’t exceed the cost of that particular pony so that they don’t appear to make income (profit). So from a taxation perspective it’s probably a pointless debate.

No, the 1k threshold is the first 1k you earn from any income including benefits, salary from a job etc. It is the most misleading paragraph in the whole legislation and confuses everyone. Licensing authorities are lobbying DEFRA to get it removed.

 

[Sossigpoker]

She comes across unhinged in this.
Like someone pointed out , sharing lifts to work doesn't make you a taxi.
Absolutely ridiculous to liken someone getting a sharer or even two in to running a riding school.
I've never been to Talland and after this, and her previous whinges on the topic ,.I'm not sure I'd want to go now.

 

[Sossigpoker]

Again I know people involved - not pammy but I'm on first name terms with others and I know this isnt a well intended badly worded post. The intent is all sharers.
Im very pro riding school and have been lucky enough to work and train at and with some of the best.
It's not bad wording it's badly intended and I'm very concerned that this will back fire and be divisive at a time when we need to be united as equestrians

Well she does come across as someone who would go to a job interview and slag off the other candidates rather than selling herself.
She needs to run her own race and leave other people alone when they have zero bearing on her business.

 

[SO1]

I expect they are loosing customers due to the number of people looking for sharers.

The post just comes across as petty. The experience someone gets as a sharer is very different to the one they get at their RS. Most people who have sharers just want a bit of extra help with their horse either financially or timewise. They are not running micro riding schools.

Leasing a top quality competition horse or pony out for a season maybe more like a commercial business. I am not sure what sort of licence you would need for that if the horse is not being kept at your premises but leased out. I think this is much less common though than a sharer.

 

[maya2008]

Shares are cheaper precisely because of the current legislation and insurance rules - you cannot make a profit. Also because there is no paid instruction included.

In the current economic climate, is it no surprise that people are looking for less expensive options?

 

[Wishfilly]

I expect they are loosing customers due to the number of people looking for sharers.

The post just comes across as petty. The experience someone gets as a sharer is very different to the one they get at their RS. Most people who have sharers just want a bit of extra help with their horse either financially or timewise. They are not running micro riding schools.

Leasing a top quality competition horse or pony out for a season maybe more like a commercial business. I am not sure what sort of licence you would need for that if the horse is not being kept at your premises but leased out. I think this is much less common though than a sharer.

Maybe my perception of Talland is different to the reality, but I can't imagine the sort of people looking for shares make up a lot of their client base?

I do think a share is a natural progression from a riding school though- I think riding schools have to accept that at some point (if they do their job well) they will lose a proportion of clients who go down a journey towards horse ownership or return to horse ownership etc. And sharing/loaning is often a step towards that. So either, you cater towards that and try to keep the business, or you work to ensure you have a steady turnover of new clients coming in.

 

[maya2008]

Maybe my perception of Talland is different to the reality, but I can't imagine the sort of people looking for shares make up a lot of their client base?

I do think a share is a natural progression from a riding school though- I think riding schools have to accept that at some point (if they do their job well) they will lose a proportion of clients who go down a journey towards horse ownership or return to horse ownership etc. And sharing/loaning is often a step towards that. So either, you cater towards that and try to keep the business, or you work to ensure you have a steady turnover of new clients coming in.

I had sharers when my children were young. Came straight from a riding school, had no idea how to ride a forward, schooled pony, how to plan their ride, how to keep up that schooling, show etiquette, anything about care beyond put saddle and bridle on and pick out feet. I had to teach them all the care for free and ensure they had lessons to iron out the other issues. By the time they were useful they usually were ready to buy their own! Do have one hilarious memory though - and a good photo that should be entitled ‘how many teenagers does it take to rug one pony?’. There were three of them trying to do it, insisting they didn’t need any help ?!

 

[AdorableAlice]

At some point, in the near or more distant future, the legalities of accepting money for a ride on a horse that is not a listed licensed and clinically examined horse, will be discussed at the highest level.

That point will come following the death of the paying person or the critical life changingly accident damaged paying person.

 

[moosea]

As I understand it, the law applies only to businesses or those hiring out for reward.
My understanding of sharing is that the sharer agrees to tke on the physical and financial responsibilities of the horse for a set number of days. There is no profit made in most private shares.
Where a riding school allows someone to share one of it's horsesm they would be doing so as part of their business and would need to be licensed.

At some point, in the near or more distant future, the legalities of accepting money for a ride on a horse that is not a listed licensed and clinically examined horse, will be discussed at the highest level.

That point will come following the death of the paying person or the critical life changingly accident damaged paying person.

I think we may be getting a bit carried away! The situation above has already occured, sadly many times.

 

[Sossigpoker]

At some point, in the near or more distant future, the legalities of accepting money for a ride on a horse that is not a listed licensed and clinically examined horse, will be discussed at the highest level.

That point will come following the death of the paying person or the critical life changingly accident damaged paying person.

Well sadly I know someone who's constantly trying to get someone to ride her sick and dangerous horse. Thankfully word has spread around but that horse shouldn't be ridden and if he is , he'll kill someone.

 

[ester]

It'll be interesting to see how it is shown you are paying for a ride on a horse.

 

[ycbm]

It'll be interesting to see how it is shown you are paying for a ride on a horse.

I suspect that all that would be required to quash the suggestion is that the sharer's payment is due whether the horse is able to be ridden or not. Job done.
.

 

[scruffyponies]

Presumably this is income after cost of keeping the pony (which you allude to)? In this case I would think anyone offering this arrangement would arrange their accounts so that the price of the ‘share’ covers but doesn’t exceed the cost of that particular pony so that they don’t appear to make income (profit). So from a taxation perspective it’s probably a pointless debate.

The £1k allowance is gross, before expenses.
That said, I'm sure HMRC would also take a dim view of someone declaring their pony loan arrangements as a business if they continually and deliberately make a loss to reduce tax on their other earned income.