The Necessity of Vettings?

legyield

legyield

Well-Known Member
Joined
31 March 2009
Messages
232
Location
Yorkshire
Visit site
What are people's views on vettings? It's just something i've been thinking about.

A few people have said that it depends on the risks. If it was a cheap horse, i.e. £1000, would you have it vetted?
What about if you were buying to sell on? If a horse had been vetted in the past, would you accept this rather than have it vetted yourself?

I know if i was to get a horse for the long term i would have it both vetted and insured. I don't know if i'd vet a horse if it was VERY cheap, i.e. £500 or so. Is there a point in having just a 2 stage vetting on anything other than a non ridden horse?

Would like peoples views on this
 
Hi,
personally I would always have the horse vetted. Even more so if its cheap, because I would want to know why it was cheap!

Regardless of what they cost to buy it will cost you the same to keep it, and you will grow attcahed to it and then not have heart to put it down if it can not ridden in the future and then you have a very expensive lawnmower for the next 15-20 years..... at least if you have it vetted you know you're not buying a problem.
wink.gif
 
problem is you could end up with a horse that you didn't want to keep and could not sell. Then what do you do with it? A cheap horse costs as much to keep or put right as an expensive one. Risks are probably higher in the first place with a cheap horse too,

Personally would also go with vetting even if only 2 stage as they do check general stuff as well as initial lameness in trot up so worth it
 
In many cases you can't insure a horse that hasn't been vetted. You don't have to opt for the full 5 stage vetting. A 2 or 3 stage is often sufficient.

The only time I wouldn't vet would be re-homing a recuse horse (becuase they do it for you) or possibly taking on a older companion where I was fully aware of the issues.
 
I was talking about this with my riding instructor the other day as both of us use vets as little as humanly possible a) because of the expense and b) because they tend to think they have to find something. We came to the conclusion that we would much rather take a knowledgeable person with than get a vetting, especially if they cheaper.
 
I get everything vetted now as I know that if I do need to sell the horse the person buying it will definatley get it vetted.

My current horse wasn't vetted, due to being bought in strange circumstances and I couldn't ride her for 2 years and I can't ever sell her as she will never pass a vetting.
 
i don't vet anything.

i can check respiration, heartrate, lameness etc myself- the only thing i can't check is eyes and bloods.

i have insured all of mine very easily with NFU including one insured for £6k including Loss Of Use.

vetting is so hit and miss- the same horse can fail one day and pass the next as vet's are so scared of the comeback if they pass a horse that turns out to have a problem.
 
I don't have mine vetted to sell on, but can do flexions ect. myself. I then normally get our vet to do the eyes and listen to heart once the horse is home, but luckily people I buy from know the score, and the horse can always go back if its not right.

If your not used to spotting lameness, wind problems ect. then get it vetted.
 
I agree with most of the above. Whether a horse is cheap or not, they can cost the same to keep and then you might not be able to sell (if you needed to). We recently bought a 5 yr old Irish Draft X who had only 3 months earlier passed a police vetting. I ummed and aahd but decided to have him 5 stage vetted - thank God I did as he has an irregular heart beat. The vet said it was unlikely he had it when born and probably didn't show at the police vetting (also advised not to buy). As it happens we're not into eventing etc but had we been, we would have lost a lot of money as he's not up to it and would have sold at a huge loss. Made a very amicable deal with the owner and now have a wonderful 17hh baby who suits my daughter perfectly for riding club activities. I guess it all depends what you want the horse for + price. It's a quandry!!
 
The last horse we had vetted was put down within 6 mnths of being purchased with severe wobblers.
In terms of insurance, anything I have insured and then 'dared' to make a claim on, has resulted in ridiculous exclusions. For example, I bought a lovely show cob 10 yrs ago, and did have him vetted, but as the vet stated he had quite flat feet, could never get his feet and legs insured! He never had a lame day in his time with me and sold him on as a happy hacker at 16, and is still sound to this day at 21.
Therefore Vetting and insurance in my mind are a waste of time and money - I go with my gut feeling and keep a savings account for unexpected vets bills.
 
I've never had anything vetted as I'm prepared to take the risk. Have had friends who have had horses pass a vet only to have a lame horse a few months down the line. It's like anything in life only risk what you can afford to lose. I have never bought anything over £2k and if buying something pricey would probably need to get it vetted for insurance purposes. I did once sell a hanovarian youngster and have to say the buyers vet missed a fairly big lump on one of her legs that should have been picked up. It didn't cause the mare any problems but I wouldn't have been too happy if I'd paid the vets fee.
 
i'm 17, so it's more a case of my dad would never buy me a horse that hadn't had a five stage vetting - he's not a risk taker, and neither am i tbh!
none of my friends had their horses vetted, and none of them have had any problems. the amount of failed vettings i've had made me wish that dad wasn't so stuck in his ways, but it would be my luck that the one horse i buy without a vetting would be a cripple.
 
Sidney, similar experience here! 3 yr old was vetted, passed and 6 months later diagnosed with wobblers!
On the other hand the 2 ex racers I have picked up without vetting have never had a thing wrong.
I would probably do a 2 stage just to check the eyes, heart and lungs if the horse is a bit more expensive.
 
[ QUOTE ]
i don't vet anything.

i can check respiration, heartrate, lameness etc myself- the only thing i can't check is eyes and bloods.

i have insured all of mine very easily with NFU including one insured for £6k including Loss Of Use.

vetting is so hit and miss- the same horse can fail one day and pass the next as vet's are so scared of the comeback if they pass a horse that turns out to have a problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

In total agreement with you. I can do most of the basic vetting myself certainly enough if I am buying a young horse, and quite honestly I wouldn't buy an old horse anyway as they are bound to have issues somewhere.
If I suspected drugging I would just ask a vet to do a 2 stage plus bloods. I seldom believe anything a seller states so go purely on what my eye can see and my riding can detect.

I have had friends who have spent hundreds on vetting horses, who either passed or failed then turned out have major issues or behavioural issues or been perfectly sound a few months down the line.
One lovely horse was found to have a heart murmur at 4 and has no sign of it now. A common thing, but at the time meant a lost sale for my friend.
He is now a superb Dressage stallion.

My own daughters pony failed the vetting on flexion tests, I got £200 off him at the time which was a bonus, I must say, and he was never lame in the 12 years of the rest of his life that we own him.
Also I am a bit wary of vets generally especially those that quickly jump to devestating conclusions like,"it could be OCD, upward fixation of the patella, Wobblers Syndrome, Shivers, Kissing spines, joint infections etc etc ". These have all been among a number of recent major "fashionable" aliments and conditions frequently seen on and discussed on HHO. Three of which were implicated in both my two young horses a few years ago, and each of which were found to be incorrect diagnosis. The first stifle lameness, (suggested to be caused by OCD, or upward fixation of the patella) found to be caused by a pricked sole and an infection in the hoof capsule, and the other to a young stallion with a very nasty allergic reaction to eating a pile of cut nettles (supposedly Wobblers syndrome!)

A lot of the basic checks a good horseperson should be able to suss out for themselves.
We used to know an old Irish horsedealer who had a fabulous eye for a good horse and could spot problems a mile off. I think I learnt much from him but my having a good background in human and animal osteology/ and biology and disease process has proveed very handy too
smile.gif
shocked.gif
 
In the future I would never buy a horse without getting it vetted.

I'd always had horses vetted in the past; however, I then bought a horse from a good friend who his very knowledgeable and experienced. He's a lovely horse but we have had a nightmare since August as he's had to have surgery, the insurer were iffy about paying out (although they did in the end with all credit to them), and all because I said I was going to have him vetted and she felt affronted by it and mentioned the fact his sweet itch would affect any insurance premium. Looking back, I'd have had the vetting.
crazy.gif


Always vet.
 
Nope. Bought four, not had any of them vetted. Ranged in price from £1,000 to many £000s. Ranged in age from three to eleven. Two have issues, but they would not have been found on a vetting, unless had done scans, etc.
 
Contacted a horse specialists vets in the area. 5 stage is £250 and 2 stage is £200. May aswell the 5 stage if i was to go with them.
I wonder what people's opinions are on getting a horse vetted after it was on full loan (for a number of months) with view to buy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top