The thorny issue of pre purchase vet checks

I think it's a really tricky issue particularly with high value horses, insurance requirements and people who don't want to spend a lot of money on a horse that *might* have a problem, less than honest sellers, as well as people wanting to challenge vets who pass a horse that later turns out to have a problem that may have been present at viewing.

Everyone is trying to protect themselves. No wonder it's gone mad :(
 
It’s a crazy crazy world is pre purchase vetting. Very complex and no easy answer.

But the older I get and the more horses I see the less emphasis I put on vettings, particularly xrays.
 
oh but its mainly an opinion and i would regard it as such i fairness to vets

the horse i had who won the most comps was condemned to death at 3!

also when vetting a young horse you are not looking at the full picture, many are unrecognizable at 10, as a breeder i would mainly sell unadvertised. broken at comps and approached by buyers, probably people who know what they want and form their own decisions regarding the results of vetting and rays etc. on their own risk taking factors, and experience

i found when dealing with international level buyers a certain problem was something they were willing to deal with if they really liked the horse
 
Very interesting and I'm inclined to agree with him tbh. I had 3(?) Failed vettings when I last looked - I'd love to know how they're doing now in all honesty!

My mum hasn't long purchased.
She had 1 failed vetting due to eye issues. The vets concern was because there was no record of the horses eyes being checked previously, he didn't know if the issues were new or old and therefore the likelihood of them changing - either at all or when - in the future.
As mum wanted a safe hack the vet felt they couldn't pass the horse as there was strong potential for further changes and the horse may have an extreme reaction at the time of the changes happening and/or develop behavioural issues such as spooking etc when the changes happen.
In that instance, for something we can't spot ourselves money well spent.

The horse she went on to buy was 5 stage vetted 3 weeks earlier by a well regarded vet, but 2 months into ownership is being referred to horsepital for what the vets believe is an old injury that had been covered up by the original sellers :mad:
Not the vets fault of course but rather unfortunate.

Total minefield.
 
I feel very differently about vettings to how I did and really understand the whole “it’s a snapshot on the day” thing.

Ive had 3 sail through 5 stage vettings and all have broken down within 18 months. I’d honestly now just be tempted to get heart and eyes checked as I can’t see them and take my chances as you’re taking a chance anyway!
 
I was thinking about vettings today while at work (clearly I wasn't doing anything interesting!)

Depending on what I was buying I would get a basic vet check done, mainly due to the fact I'd be a first time buyer but unless something flagged up on that and I really liked the horse I wouldn't bother with x Ray's Etc.
 
Interesting but a bit in accurate as we do vet TB's at the sales, yearlings go with full x-rays and scopes. I even had a poor high value foal scoped 4 times over two days as each of the clients used a different vet, which I think was very unfair. But the pre sale checks are very different to a 5 stage vetting in riding horses, no flexion tests.
 
Laafet said:
Interesting but a bit in accurate as we do vet TB's at the sales, yearlings go with full x-rays and scopes. I even had a poor high value foal scoped 4 times over two days as each of the clients used a different vet, which I think was very unfair. But the pre sale checks are very different to a 5 stage vetting in riding horses, no flexion tests.
Click to expand...


I am not certain but I think the author is from Belgium so perhaps pre sale checks in the TB industry are different there? I really don't know though
 
A horse I bought had a failed vetting, about 8 years ago..but I took a chance on him. And he is still going strong, not a day off lame bar one abcess ..vet doing the PPR, said pidgeon toed, not tracking up right, held tail funny..he was fresh off transporter from Ireland was only 5 years old. Brilliant record now in BE and PC
 
I've had so many friends horses having problems after vettings I just don't see the point in them anymore? I didn't vet any of mine and had no issues.

A poor friend currently - 5* vetting done as bought a horse from reputable trainer and has now been diagnosed with arthritis pretty much everywhere and bad suspensories.
I just don't see how he would of passed a 5* vetting with flying colours only 3 months ago but vettings are only valid for that day it seems...
 
Difficult. I have bought horses with a basic vetting in the past with no problems but I was not expecting to be doing high level sports with them. I had a youngster (that I had owned since a foal) vetted at 4 years old by a potential buyer who failed a flexion test and the vet suggested cartrophen injections into the joint. I didnt fancy the idea but got my vet out to check horse over etc and when she tested him he was sound (so I looked like a complete noodle yet again). So I just left him for a bit out in the field etc and when his flu jabs were being done chatted to the vet again (different one from same place) who tested him again. No sign of lameness. He went on loan and was bought a few months later and went hunting and jumping etc.
 
I will continue to get vetting done, but mainly for insurance purposes. Having recently put a horse down just over a year (and a LOT of problems) after she passed a 5 stage, I am inclined to question the validity of the report, especially with regard to the horse’s ability to do what is expected of it by the purchaser.

I’m just not sure what would replace it, in terms of assessing soundness. Most people I know wouldn’t spot a lame horse if it kicked them in the face.
 
Flicker said:
I will continue to get vetting done, but mainly for insurance purposes. Having recently put a horse down just over a year (and a LOT of problems) after she passed a 5 stage, I am inclined to question the validity of the report, especially with regard to the horse’s ability to do what is expected of it by the purchaser.

I’m just not sure what would replace it, in terms of assessing soundness. Most people I know wouldn’t spot a lame horse if it kicked them in the face.
Click to expand...

This is the approach I take - it's often required for insurance, and I appreciate an extra pair of eyes when it comes to movement and soundness. I'm good at spotting some types of lameness, and terrible at others. I'm also not qualified to do a heart or eye check and those are relatively easy things for a vet to check on the day. Best to treat it as a surface level snapshot.
 
ycbm said:
I gave up vettings long ago. I've never lost a horse to anything that would have shown up on a vetting.

.
Click to expand...
I have never had a horse vetted but tbh, I have never spent a huge amount on a horse and I stopped insuring years ago. I have lost 3 young (ish) horses, none of them to anything that could have been spotted in a vetting. And have kept others into their 30s.
 
I think it’s good to have done if your unsure of obvious signs of trouble but I can see why experienced horse people wouldn’t bother.
Even Valegro failed for his stud licence and was sold for a fraction of the price the breeders were hoping for.
 
Dwyran_gold said:
I think it’s good to have done if your unsure of obvious signs of trouble but I can see why experienced horse people wouldn’t bother.
Even Valegro failed for his stud licence and was sold for a fraction of the price the breeders were hoping for.
Click to expand...


Also reputedly failed to sell after 2012 because he wouldn't pass a vet yet got gold in 2016 :)
 
Its really hard I think.
I havent had a horse vetted since my childhood ponies (who had what would be a 2 stage now)
But my horses since then have all been free or very low price (<£1k)

If I was looking for a 5 figure horse I would want some assurance that I wasn't buying an obvious problem. That would be a huge lifetime investment for me and I couldnt accept the added risk of not vetting tbh.
My write offs and retirements have not been through things that a vetting would have picked up on but I definitely think they have a place for potential buyers. Of course you really need a decent relationship with a sensible vet to make the best of it.
 
I have had mine vetted. Not that I think it will stop them going wrong but I am not experienced enough to see problems. I really liked one horse, had been told he had had a mild injury and had been declared fit and sound and signed off by vet school. Luckily close enough for my vet to come out. He asked for the full vet report and it actually said horse was still bilaterally 1/10 lame, it was a major ligament, the horse had issues starting in feet. My vet had just pts my previous horse and said he wasn’t going to continue the vetting as it was a straight “no” but actually trotted up and said lame behind. If I had not got him vetted I would have bought him and a pile of issues. I was gutted as he really was such a lovely horse.
 
I bought spud based on him...as he was..because he was so good for me. I had partloaned then loaned him as was based purely on him. I bought him because i could not bare to loose him. And to this day he is my horse of a lifetime. Nothing will change what he has done for me and given me.

If i had not known him and was buying him and vetted him, he would have failed within seconds and i would have missed out on having a horse who has made my dreams come true. He is not 100%..he has issues that i need to take care of and be aware of constantly...the vet knows him on a first name basis. But he is 20 and still giving me the ride of my life and has changed my life in so many ways. I can't imagine not having had him. He has set the bar VERY high for my next horse and whilst i want to say i will 5* vet the next horse because of the issues i found after i bought spud, at the end of the day he is doing what i want to be doing and im happy with the care he needs. Yes i want a sound healthy horse but many things that "fail" a vet can be managed. My friends mare has mild ringbone so would fail any vetting...but for my friend what they can do is perfect...she doesnt want to jump or hunt she just wants a happy hacker and the mare is perfect for that just needs a little more thought to her care.

I get it when its major money, for example i watched a youtube and he was spending big money for a proper competition horse and vet check showed a seriously mild lameness which when looked into with xrays etc showed an issue that would never be resolved and the horse was going to be as is forever...not suitable for that buyer...but would never even be spotted by anyone bar that high of a competitive person. Horse will be fine for most other people. But a "failed vet" will impact that horse.

I don't know what im trying to say. Basically you need to know what the horse is for, and base the vet on what they will be actually doing.
 
There is definitely a need for vettings. Maybe the current forms could be improved?

Think of the member on here who was sold a drugged horse. They had blood taken at the vetting and when tested it came back positive and so did the feed that the dealer had sent the horse with.

Think of a novice buyer and how much they need an independant, experienced set of eyes. There is a reason why some of the dodgiest dealers also have dodgy vets in their pockets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top