The dealer that cannot be named

I have not had a horse from this dealer, although both times I have bought I have requested information from her as she is relatively local to me. Ironically the horse I was initially interested is the only one on the Facebook page that appears to have been trouble free and as described. (The person who bought the horse still has it five years later,). However having had to return a misdescribed horse to another dealer and deal with the guilt associated with that, I find the comparison to no quibble Amazon returns insulting to people who have with the best intentions thought they were buying an honestly described horse from a reputable dealer who wanted to ensure that the horse ended up in the right long term home, hence the option of the trial period. If the horses had been as described then relatively few would have been returned or had several trials. The emotional and financial commitment associated with horse buying is huge and not something most people enter into lightly and the majority buy a particular horse because they intend to keep it. The people who will have bought from this dealer will have had transport costs, vetting costs and livery fees, likely to be in excess of a £1000 in total; I certainly wouldn't commit to spending this if I wasn't reasonably confident the horse was likely to be staying. The horses and the buyers should not have been put in this situation, responsibility rests with the dealer.
 
Littlest Hobo said:
But surely buying a horse because there was an easy option to send the poor creature back if you changed your mind should NOT be a good thing!

Perhaps it makes it too easy for the prospective owner to not think the whole thing through properly?
I have never, and would never buy any animal thinking I could " just send it back"!

Doesn't matter what anyone says or thinks about whose fault the bad decision making was, this, as far as I am concerned is a vile way to treat any animal, let alone a species upset by changes of home.
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree, but I don't think that was the case in the buyers minds.

I think it was the fact that SWSNBN highlighted it in her sales pitch made buyers think she was trustworthy and gave them confidence in the horses she was selling being as described. A reverse physcology tactic if you must.
 
Apizz2019 said:
Very much the same as the buyers did! They too took a risk and ignored red flags.

The buyers were unaware horses were being passed around. Joe Public wasn't aware either as the horses were almost always still advertised for sale while out on trial.

Buyers didn't invest serious money, and time, thinking they would be handing the horse back at the end of the trial period. That's the point I think you are missing!
Click to expand...
Ok, well if you can't see the difference between buying a vehicle and buying a horse, and that the psychological approach and appetite for risk between the two should be different (no matter what the law says), then I'm not sure there is much more to say.


Littlest Hobo said:
But surely buying a horse because there was an easy option to send the poor creature back if you changed your mind should NOT be a good thing!

Perhaps it makes it too easy for the prospective owner to not think the whole thing through properly?
I have never, and would never buy any animal thinking I could " just send it back"!

Doesn't matter what anyone says or thinks about whose fault the bad decision making was, this, as far as I am concerned is a vile way to treat any animal, let alone a species upset by changes of home.
Click to expand...
This.
 
DabDab said:
Ok, well if you can't see the difference between buying a vehicle and buying a horse, and that the psychological approach and appetite for risk between the two should be different (no matter what the law says), then I'm not sure there is much more to say.
Click to expand...
I can see the difference, and I would never buy an animal only on the pretence of being able to return without quibble.

You've hit the nail on the head with one word though - 'psychological'.

This, I believe, is where SWSNBN preyed on her buyers weaknesses. An animal is an emotional investment, we all know that, she knew that. It's not merely a financial transaction, and I think that's an element she used to great effect when manipulating buyers.

Interestingly, not one of the posters on the Facebook page, that I have seen anyway, has referenced the trial and return process as being a motivating factor for their purchase. This is only mentioned when they have tried to get their money returned. In fact, most appear to have been devastated that they had to return the horse, some were seriously injured, others persevered, and one I've seen had the horse pts.

It apppears that SWSNBN was pushy, manipulative, talked the talk, and sold them what they thought were perfect horses, and they fell for that. Not the trial and return process. Although that would have helped lead them into a false sense of security that everything was above board.
 
Yes in my view the trial and return was the final reassurance. You emotionally invest in a horse. And when one seller pushed for a viewing she was told horses being sent back was incredibly rare. So I think people thought they had found their perfect horse who had been properly assessed and was well matched to their needs by someone very experienced. And the horse was coming from 'one of the good ones' who is totally honest and easy to deal with. And look she offers a no-questions-asked money back guarantee so she MUST be confident in her skills at placing horses in perfect homes. Becuase otherwise why would she offer that. And look at all these happy people singing her praises. Not one bad review and she's being going for years!

With all the horror stories of horses being missold despite viewings and vetting, I totally see why people thought this was a safe bet, and never imagined they would be sending back.
 
Just to add yes there will have been buyers genuinely 'trialling' the horse for a week and viewing it as a trial with a 'may send back' mindset from the outset. I don't agree with that. But I honestly believe they were the minority from the stories coming out, with most people seeing it as a reassuring safety net they never believed they would need.
 
On another note, I have just seen a post where the police have advised a caller that SWSNBN no longer resides at the address in Cambs.

I'd love to think her husband has given her the boot, but, sadly, it is probably another carefully manufactured lie.
 
Apizz2019 said:
I disagree.

She is a fraudster and is entirely responsible for her actions and the trail of destruction she leaves in her wake.

Yes, in an ideal world we should all view, vet, then buy, however, even with these things, it may not have prevented a lot of the issues buyers experienced here as not all horses failed vettings, and not all issues would have been discovered at a viewing. It also would not have prevented vast amounts of money not being returned to buyers.

The attractive part of her sales process was being able to buy but also have the no quibble trial period. This in itself is ridiculous as she is a business and consumer rights trumped her terms anyway, but, as I've said before, she talked a very good talk and is an established conwoman.

Buyers thought they were dealing with someone with a good reputation, they had a glossy trial period, horses were open to vettings, no quibble returns etc. It was all great. Until it wasnt.

Let's remember, H&H moderators, admins of groups that have seen it all, sales platforms, and others, have all been taken in by this unscrupulous woman.

Is that because they are stupid? No. Is it because they are inexperienced? No.
It is because they have been manipulated by a calculated fraudster.

I assume from your logic, with a viewing and vetting beforehand, every sale ever has been trouble free and new horse and new human have lived together happily ever after?
Click to expand...
Well I was caught by a DD in Scotland not this one. I went and saw the horse tried him out had him fully 5 stage vetted got him home (with 6 bags of chaff & nuts 6 meals) "kindly "given just for the "change over" by DD after a few days horse not right. Turns out drugged up to the eye balls and 6 bags of food all laced with bute! I had the blood taken at vetting run so proved he was drugged. So even going through all the correct motions it doesn't necessarily work out!
 
Apizz2019 said:
I think you're missing the point.

This dealer was reputable as far as people could see. Everything about her was censored, everywhere. On every platform, this forum included!

How do you know the majority of buyers were not experienced? The two people I know personally were not inexperienced. A lot of the people posting on the Facebook group do not appear to be inexperienced either.
Click to expand...
The dodgy Scottish dealer who caught me came highly recommended on this very forum!!
 
Someone has just told me, (I dont know how true this is, so don't quote me), that SWSNBN has operated under other business names previously, not from the current location, and not in her actual name. Think along the lines of 'a place stables'. These businesses have had reports of refund disputes and delays, legal threats, misrepresentation of horses, passport discrepancies, and, interestingly, also offered a 14 day trial.

If this is correct, this isn't her first rodeo.

I won't quote the yard names given just in case this is incorrect but it would be interesting to understand if this goes much further back than we realise.

On another note, look at the eyewatering £££ involved, just from those on the Facebook page alone! 😯😯
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20260219_153733_Facebook.jpg
    Screenshot_20260219_153733_Facebook.jpg
    31 KB · Views: 11
Doesn't surprise me when I was having a nose/dig the other day there was almost a circle of possibles naturally accruing
And there is so little about her property of herself it rang alarm bells of a bigger picture /circle of problems

And then KT pops up asking questions like a stupid person.
 
I'm Dun said:
yes and she is very much the epitome of leopards don't change their spots!
Click to expand...
I've not heard much about this one other than she has reformed and is on the straight and narrow now, so I assume past dealings may not have been whiter than white.

I must admit, for entirely pedantic reasons, her posts and videos annoy me so I tend to scroll on by.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top