Should i pay the bill?

[ester]

personally i would have paid the full cost of the x rays 7 weeks ago. The incident happened whilst under your care.
I could not have stood back and watched it lame for 7 weeks and not got it x rayed and paid for them whilst I was responsible.

Not read replies but I don't care what contract says. Horse got injured in your care, morally for me the least you can do is pay for an X-ray.

I agree with both of you really, which is why I am wondering what the vet had diagnosed and recommending PTS for given the lack of work up that seems to have happened. It doesn't make sense that you would just let something get worse?

 

[SusieT]

In this case I would x-ray the horse. I would also pay for all costs to diagnose the horse within reason (x-ray, scan, nervce blocks) as the injury happened in my care - if the horse is long term lame then there is a dicussion to be had.

To not pay is very cheap imo

 

[deicinmerlyn]

personally i would have paid the full cost of the x rays 7 weeks ago. The incident happened whilst under your care.
I could not have stood back and watched it lame for 7 weeks and not got it x rayed and paid for them whilst I was responsible.

This

 

[stormox]

Why not just let her have the horse back, she can then try the free livery for however long she wants and the horse will either recover, or stay the same after which as she now has care of the horse she cannot decide what to do.

 

[scats]

How many weeks ago did the injury occur and has the horse been hopping lame ever since, despite bute? I'm struggling to understand why an X-ray or a decision in some way wasn't made earlier for the sake of the animal.

 

[AmyMay]

How many weeks ago did the injury occur and has the horse bend hopping lame ever since, despite bute? I'm struggling to understand why an X-ray or a decision in some way wasn't made earlier for the sake of the animal.

Got to agree.

 

[Honey08]

If money isn't a problem for you, which you state, then I don't understand why you haven't already had him xrayed to find out a full story on the issue. Out of care for the horse and respect for the owner. And I agree with those wondering why the horse has been left so long if he's getting worse. I think you're letting the horse down. I can understand deciding to send the horse back (that's why I'd never send a horse out on loan, particularly without insurance, as the loaner can damage it and dump it).

 

[Sussexbythesea]

If money isn't a problem for you, which you state, then I don't understand why you haven't already had him xrayed to find out a full story on the issue. Out of care for the horse and respect for the owner. And I agree with those wondering why the horse has been left so long if he's getting worse. I think you're letting the horse down. I can understand deciding to send the horse back (that's why I'd never send a horse out on loan, particularly without insurance, as the loaner can damage it and dump it).

Totally agree the poor horse is the one that's suffering and all the OP seems to care about is who should pay for what.

 

[Fiona]

We have a pony on loan for my son, and he went lame behind last summer. Within the week, he had been to the vet hospital and had a full work up including lots of x-rays so we knew what we were dealing with..

All paid by myself and my husband. .

Fiona

 

[Buddy'sMum]

...I don't care what contract says. Horse got injured in your care, morally for me the least you can do is pay for an X-ray.

Yep.

 

[GirlFriday]

Sorry OP but as far as I can see until you have (given notice and) returned the pony you would be responsible for the bill. It isn't completely clear to me from the exert you've given of the contract if you need to give more notice now the horse has been off work for more than 30 days. So, to avoid bad feeling, I'd simply give notice tomorrow and return the pony in 30 days. Until that point you cover all bills. It doesn't sound as though you want continued responsibility for the animal so I'd be looking for you to return it asap.

Moral responsibility is of course a different thing. In that sense I'd sort of think you had some kind of obligation to see pony through treatment and recovery but do understand that could be a long and expensive process with multiple options it might be hard for you to agree with owner.

 

[Vodkagirly]

In this case I would x-ray the horse. I would also pay for all costs to diagnose the horse within reason (x-ray, scan, nervce blocks) as the injury happened in my care - if the horse is long term lame then there is a dicussion to be had.

To not pay is very cheap imo

This.

 

[zaminda]

My 21 year old mare injured herself on Easter Saturday. The vet came out, and it was decided to take her to the hospital as the injury was near a joint. She stayed there a week, and mercifully didn't need surgery. I can't understand why proper diagnosis wasn't done at the time of the injury, or what sort of vet would be talking about surgery without proper diagnostics.

 

[Mike007]

My 21 year old mare injured herself on Easter Saturday. The vet came out, and it was decided to take her to the hospital as the injury was near a joint. She stayed there a week, and mercifully didn't need surgery. I can't understand why proper diagnosis wasn't done at the time of the injury, or what sort of vet would be talking about surgery without proper diagnostics.

Trust me! there are a fair number of such vets about, The ability to absorb and spout out facts over a seven year course does not necessarily mean that one is a practical and observant ,thoughtful vet. I recall a horse with a field injury. Over the course of 18 months the animal would go sound ,they would try to work it ,it would immediately go chronically lame. All sorts of hi tech equipment was used to diagnose. BUT NO ONE DID AN OLD FASHIONED X RAY, I have a copy of the x ray when it was finally done.It clearly shows a fence staple embedded in the tendon sheath!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Theocat]

The horse is twenty. Depending on how long the OP has had him it might have been difficult to get insurance, so I think that's a moot point.

The injury happened seven weeks ago. The vet has been involved throughout, and does not think the horse will recover without surgery. Surgery isn't an option because of the insurance - and I'm not sure it's something to put a twenty year old through, anyway.

OP and vet seem to think putting the horse down is therefore the best way forward for the sake of the horse. Owner agrees to the extent of paying the money and the hunt being booked, but decides a time the last moment - because she's suddenly in a position, with free livery, to take the horse back - that she wants to do x-rays. As surgery still won't be an option, it will be a question of Bute - after almost two months of Bute already whilst the horse deteriorates - and more rest.

I'm really not sure what the X-ray is supposed to achieve: presumably it will either show surgery is required - in which case it sounds as though the owner wants to try rest anyway - or that it isn't required - which still just means rest!

If the vet thinks surgery is necessary for recovery, and that all an x-ray will do is confirm that, and surgery isn't an option, then why would you x-ray?

If the horse had more options then I'd agree that's the OP should pay for diagnostics - but I suspect that would have been done already. But as the only options appear to be put down, or field rest which is, in the vet's opinion, unlikely to work, I can't see that the OP - who has already covered seven weeks of vet care - is morally liable for further costs.

The owner is lucky, given some of the horror stories, that the OP didn't just give thirty days notice and hand the horse back - or even no notice at all!

 

[ycbm]

In this case I would x-ray the horse. I would also pay for all costs to diagnose the horse within reason (x-ray, scan, nervce blocks) as the injury happened in my care - if the horse is long term lame then there is a dicussion to be had.

To not pay is very cheap imo

What a nasty expression to use, 'cheap'.

And 'happened in my care' is not the same as 'was due to my negligence'.

One of the points of a loan is to be able to return if things like this happen, as is clear in the contact.

The vet is recommending euthanasia, which in my experience is something they don't do easily. We don't know what the injury was, but if soft tissue with no external wound then x rays would be useless. And if bone is involved and months cross tied would be required, that's out, as is an operation. So it's easy to see why none have been done.

I think the OP has been more than reasonable.

 

[jumping.jack_flash]

Don't be tight. Pay for the X-ray / Ultra Sound - as you could be putting a horse to sleep for no real reason that a simple injection could solve. 20 yrs old is NOT old.

Also... here's hoping your not sending the horse to the Hunt live and it is dispatched at home?

 

[FfionWinnie]

Don't be tight. Pay for the X-ray / Ultra Sound - as you could be putting a horse to sleep for no real reason that a simple injection could solve. 20 yrs old is NOT old.

Also... here's hoping your not sending the horse to the Hunt live and it is dispatched at home?

Fgs 20 IS old in this situation and as for your last comment why on earth would you come out with that. There is nothing in this thread that suggests the lame horse is going to be sent away to be killed. It wouldn't be legal to transport a lame horse for slaughter anyway.

The only thing the op did wrong was not to have insurance. I've done the same myself. They won't make that mistake again I'm sure.

 

[ester]

The horse is twenty. Depending on how long the OP has had him it might have been difficult to get insurance, so I think that's a moot point.

The injury happened seven weeks ago. The vet has been involved throughout, and does not think the horse will recover without surgery. Surgery isn't an option because of the insurance - and I'm not sure it's something to put a twenty year old through, anyway.

OP and vet seem to think putting the horse down is therefore the best way forward for the sake of the horse. Owner agrees to the extent of paying the money and the hunt being booked, but decides a time the last moment - because she's suddenly in a position, with free livery, to take the horse back - that she wants to do x-rays. As surgery still won't be an option, it will be a question of Bute - after almost two months of Bute already whilst the horse deteriorates - and more rest.

I'm really not sure what the X-ray is supposed to achieve: presumably it will either show surgery is required - in which case it sounds as though the owner wants to try rest anyway - or that it isn't required - which still just means rest!

If the vet thinks surgery is necessary for recovery, and that all an x-ray will do is confirm that, and surgery isn't an option, then why would you x-ray?

If the horse had more options then I'd agree that's the OP should pay for diagnostics - but I suspect that would have been done already. But as the only options appear to be put down, or field rest which is, in the vet's opinion, unlikely to work, I can't see that the OP - who has already covered seven weeks of vet care - is morally liable for further costs.

The owner is lucky, given some of the horror stories, that the OP didn't just give thirty days notice and hand the horse back - or even no notice at all!

I think the intention is that it will show whether rest if feasible or a welfare issue to even try if it is beyond that. It would be easier to comment if we did know what the current diagnosis was though but the OP seems to have gone awol, they haven't even clarified when someone asked regarding if their loan agreement is still the standard wording which would have them responsible for incidents in their care regardless of fault. They could have given notice 7 weeks ago if they wished but didn't.

I am still pretty shocked that a horse has been lame for 7 weeks and deteriorating and not as far as we know investigate . I am saddened that someone who says money is no issue will not stump up <£300 for a horse they have taken care of to get this sorted asap.

 

[alainax]

I would see it like owner has already gave you the pts money. It's not an extra £80 for X-ray, that's the pts money and is separate. So you pay for the X-ray, as you are responsible for vet costs, and worse case scenario you still have the money in the account to pts.

 

[ycbm]

The loaner is going to either have the horse PTS or return it for field rest. The owner wants the x ray to decide whether the horse should be PTS on vet's current advice or field rested.

I'm baffled in what way the loaner is responsible for paying for an x ray neither she nor her vet wants.

There are plenty of lame horses on rest on vet's advice which have not been x rayed. So this stuff about 'horse has been lame seven weeks already and not properly investigated' is pointless.

 

[FfionWinnie]

I would see it like owner has already gave you the pts money. It's not an extra £80 for X-ray, that's the pts money and is separate. So you pay for the X-ray, as you are responsible for vet costs, and worse case scenario you still have the money in the account to pts.

Yes I agree with this. The loanee should return the horse to soundness or if that isn't possible, find out what is wrong with it at least and the prognosis.

 

[ycbm]

I am still pretty shocked that a horse has been lame for 7 weeks and deteriorating and not as far as we know investigate . I am saddened that someone who says money is no issue will not stump up <£300 for a horse they have taken care of to get this sorted asap.

Ester they did get it sorted. They had the hunt actually booked to come and put the horse down. It is the owner responsible fur the current delay, not the loaner.

 

[ycbm]

Yes I agree with this. The loanee should return the horse to soundness or if that isn't possible, find out what is wrong with it at least and the prognosis.

But she has a prognosis. Vet has told her that the horse is unlikely to recover, even with an operation if one were possible, which for money reasons, it is not.

 

[ycbm]

Are peeler missing this in the first sentence?

'I have a horse on loan who has an injury that my vet has given a very poor prognosis for. I have taken vets advice at every stage and given all treatment necessary up to this point.'

 

[Leo Walker]

I'm pretty sure that legally the contract is deemed to have ended as the owner made arrangements for the horse to be PTS. Surely that would end the contract regardless of whether they then cancelled it.

 

[Leo Walker]

The horse was booked to be PTS and the money was paid by the owner. Surely that cancels the legal contract regardless of anything else?

 

[FfionWinnie]

But she has a prognosis. Vet has told her that the horse is unlikely to recover, even with an operation if one were possible, which for money reasons, it is not.

If it was my old horse and I thought rest would fix it I'd take it back and sort it myself. I'd still rather think the loanee should pay for the X-ray tho. In the great scheme of horses a few hundred quid is nothing and it happened when in the loanee's care. Morally if I was the loanee I would feel obliged that the x ray was the final thing to do to lay the matter to rest one way or another.

It's a similar situation to a pony I sold who very sadly got kicked on the knee fairy soon after I sold it. It was insured and they did go for surgery but unfortunately it was unable to be fixed and was not woken up. It got worse in the time it was waiting for surgery and would have continued to go down hill due to the nature of the injury, had they rested her.

The x ray told the owner it was surgery or PTS.

 

[MiJodsR2BlinkinTite]

OK so when I put my cob on loan, it was to a BHS training/college yard, and I had to have insurance before he went on loan; plus it was the understanding that even if the injury happened while he was being used by them, I'd be responsible for half of the vet fees.

Whilst I appreciate this is a totally different situation, there are basic principles which I think apply, i.e. usually when a horse goes on loan the owner NOT the loanee, is responsible for paying the insurance. However as this is an old horse, getting insurance in any case would have been prohibitive and/or vets fees would have been excluded anyway, so that doesn't help to clarify the situation one jot!

Secondly, normally the loanee would pay ALL of the vets fees (and other fees) which are incurred as a result of keeping the horse.

In this situation, the lines have become a bit blurred and this is causing a considerable difficulty.

Owner is obviously strapped for cash, and possibly, just possibly, tho' I'm not saying this IS the case before anyone jumps down my throat, was glad to relieve herself of the responsibility of an aged horse that is bound to be increasingly expensive. OP took on the horse in good faith and was obviously prepared to give it all the care & vet attention necessary, of that there is no doubt.

Now owner has "gone precious" and wants the loanee to spend money on further investigations, possibly have the horse back as she's got free livery for a limited period. But what happens after that would be my concern: does the owner have enough money to (a) pay the very considerable vets fees that will result in future for this horse, whether or not the X-rays are done there will probably be stuff like medication to pay for, more vets fees in future, etc etc, and (b) paying for livery for an old horse which will probably need either Full or Assisted livery. Has the owner taken all this into consideration before making her demands? I am not sure she has TBH.

The loanee (OP) is in a difficult situation and I feel for her dilemma. Personally I cannot see the point of X-rays as IMO that would be unnecessary expense and would only tell everyone what they already know and that is that the time has come for a decision to be made about this horse. It presumably has no more use as a ridden horse, is in pain now??? and the vet is basically saying the time has come for a decision.

The other problem is that, unfortunately, this accident DID happen whilst the horse is in the care of the OP. It happened at her yard, whilst she had custody of the horse. As someone else has said, if this horse were say 10 rather than 20, there would be clamours on here for OP to pay up all bills and look sweet. Just because the horse is 20, does that change that?? Difficult one.

If it were my horse, and I was the owner, with limited finances for future vet care and livery, then however hard that would be, I know what my decision would have to be.

I think OP that you would do well in this very difficult situation, to at least offer to pay half of the investigative work the owner has requested. Apparently friends of the owner are suggesting that you pay up and look sweet?? Yes it might be a bit of an expense, a useless outlay in your opinion, but the bottom line is that the incident DID occur at your yard, and whilst someone else's horse was in YOUR care, and yes I think I would be a bit devastated in this situation if the loanee refused point-blank to pay anything, if I'm brutally honest.

If this was my horse which I put on loan to someone, I know I'd be very upset indeed, especially if she's reading this on here.......

What an awful situation. Hope the right decisions are made for this poor horse. It unfortunately all too happens that sentimentality gets in the way of making a humane decision for an old friend.

 

[Cecile]

Difficult one really

You say you are taking legal advice and hopefully that will answer your questions

If it were my horse out on loan I would want him/her home to see my own vet and make decisions based on that or if fairly local send my vet there to give me his honest opinion

I sent a driving pony on loan for many years and when the loaners situation changed she came home to me, pony had cushings and a few other related issues at that point and when I later made the decision to put her down my husband went to the vets to pay the bill (I hate those bills coming to my house) and the loaner had already been to the vets and paid the entire bill but she was not responsible for the bill

Everyone is so different, situations are different and people have horses for different reasons, riding/competing and sometimes as a companion horse.

It would seem your vet has given his opinion, put down was agreed on, booked in and money for this paid for and now the owner has changed her mind (Every right to do so) so as I say if the horse was mine I would want him home in this situation, I would see it as the loan is over and the situation and responsibility as mine if I had changed my mind about having the horse put down

My husband would rightly so pull me up and stop me allowing a roller coaster of emotions + changing the goal posts and make me deal with this head on, I assume the owner has had direct contact with the vet who has been in charge of the horse