Smogul
Well-Known Member
Vets no longer pass or fail horses but say they are either suitable or unsuitable. What have you said to the seller when the vet has said the horse was not suitable for what you wanted it for?
Unsuccessful vetting
- Thread starter Smogul
- Start date
oldie48
Well-Known Member
I would just tell the owner what the vet has said and as I am paying for his/her advice, I've decided to take it. However, it would depend on what he said. When we bought our connie xtb he said he thought it was unsuitable for my 10 year daughter as he was 5 and clearly could be a handful. We bought him, had lots of help etc and he was a complete superstar competition pony. In his later years he ended up on loan to one of the partners as a schoolmaster eventer for his daughter, the best thing I have ever bought.
Barton Bounty
Just simply loving life with Orbi 🥰
I would say the horse is not suitable for what I require. I would take that as a failed vetting 
But as oldie says, it depends on what you want it for and what discipline your going to be doing I guess
But as oldie says, it depends on what you want it for and what discipline your going to be doing I guess
Red-1
I used to be decisive, now I'm not so sure...
If I leave a deposit, I say that it is on condition of a satisfactory vetting.
That vetting was not satisfactory, so I would have the deposit back.
That vetting was not satisfactory, so I would have the deposit back.
Sossigpoker
Well-Known Member
Vets have never passed or failed horses at vettings. The vetting is to assess whether the purchase represents an acceptable level of risk for the intended purpose.
HollyWoozle
Well-Known Member
Deleted: Wrong thread, sorry!
Last edited:
webble
Well-Known Member
If there is nothing wrong with the horse and its just not right for you then I would apologise to the seller and walk away. If there is something physically wrong I would explain and ask for any deposit back
Cortez
Tough but Fair
Any vetting is an advisement, so it is up to you whether you take the advise or not. If the sale was subject to vetting then you can inform the seller that the vet has not passed the horse and that you are either going to go ahead with the purchase or not.
Wheresthehoofpick
Well-Known Member
I think from a difficult experience is that the key is to be clear before you have the vetting what your intentions are and clarify those with the seller.
Leaving a "deposit subject to vetting" is not really a very helpful statement.
So in writing you need something clearer. " I have paid £x as a deposit on ?? I will have the horse vetted. The deposit is fully refundable if I decide as a result of the vetting that the horse is not suitable for my purposes and I do not wish to proceed with the purchase".
Some sellers may disagree but when I have bought and sold I want the horse to go the right home so I would be happy with this.
Leaving a "deposit subject to vetting" is not really a very helpful statement.
So in writing you need something clearer. " I have paid £x as a deposit on ?? I will have the horse vetted. The deposit is fully refundable if I decide as a result of the vetting that the horse is not suitable for my purposes and I do not wish to proceed with the purchase".
Some sellers may disagree but when I have bought and sold I want the horse to go the right home so I would be happy with this.
Last edited:
Wheresthehoofpick
Well-Known Member
If you just change your mind about the purchase then in most cases you would lose your deposit. My favourite was "I actually wanted a mare."
??
?
??
?Bobthecob15
Well-Known Member
This was our receipt for our last pony, feel free to copy!
Vendor – name and address
Purchaser – name and address
I confirm receipt of the sum of £250 as a deposit for the purchase of xxxHH chestnut gelding named xxxxxxx
I confirm that the deposit is to be refunded in the event of the pre purchase vetting identifying that this pony is not suitable for the intended purpose of ‘First Ridden Pony’ (you can put whatever you are after here, the vet will ask you what you want to use the horse for as your main purpose)
Agreed Final Purchase Price is xxxx also include, saddle etc to be paid on...
Hope that is useful
Vendor – name and address
Purchaser – name and address
I confirm receipt of the sum of £250 as a deposit for the purchase of xxxHH chestnut gelding named xxxxxxx
I confirm that the deposit is to be refunded in the event of the pre purchase vetting identifying that this pony is not suitable for the intended purpose of ‘First Ridden Pony’ (you can put whatever you are after here, the vet will ask you what you want to use the horse for as your main purpose)
Agreed Final Purchase Price is xxxx also include, saddle etc to be paid on...
Hope that is useful
Cortez
Tough but Fair
What could be clearer than "subject to vetting"? It literally says everything that you have expounded above, just more succinctly and with less effort.
Smogul
Well-Known Member
Trouble was I ended up with a furious seller who said that the vet knew nothing about driving so how could he judge if the horse was suitable. I wish I had stuck to the old-style "failed the vetting" terminology. I ended up putting the phone down on them.
No deposits or anything were involved so that wasn't really my question.
SO1
Well-Known Member
I think in these cases it can be frustrating for the seller if you just say not suitable for X without any more detail.
If the vet says not suitable due to a medical issue then I would be open and explain the problem as it at least gives the seller the chance to get a vet to look at the horse and potentially treat it.
You have paid a lot of money for vetting and perhaps in the best interests of the horse passing on information to the seller which may help help treat the horse or market it to a more suitable home may be a kind thing to do.
If the vet says not suitable due to a medical issue then I would be open and explain the problem as it at least gives the seller the chance to get a vet to look at the horse and potentially treat it.
You have paid a lot of money for vetting and perhaps in the best interests of the horse passing on information to the seller which may help help treat the horse or market it to a more suitable home may be a kind thing to do.
SantaVera
Well-Known Member
Ihad a horse vetted ,wanted to buy it for competition work. vet advised it wouldnt be suitable (flexion test fail), it went on to spend many years competing and was eventually retired to stud. so you never can tell really. I just told the vendor that I was sorry but I couldnt buy it.
Bobthecob15
Well-Known Member
Same, we had one vetted for my daughter, the vet said he wasn't suitable as he had teeth issues which could be sorted with surgery and didn't like having his back legs held for any period...she said he wasn't suitable as a child's pony given his behaviour at the vetting. We shared the report with the owner and got our deposit back.
Abacus
Well-Known Member
I believe there is a difference. ‘Subject to vetting’ tends to imply that you want the deposit back in case of physical/medical issues coming to light. If you are clearer that you intend to take the advice of the vet on the suitability of the horse for X activity then it’s easier to back out from the purchase of a sound but somehow unsuitable horse. Which might include how they handle, or if a potential eventer bolts at the sight of a jump… etc.
splashgirl45
Lurcher lover
My friend wanted a happy hacker and the vet said the horse was fine for that but if my friend had been a competition rider he would have said not suitable. My friend rode her till she was 26 and she was PTS at 28, she was a great horse for my friends purpose and only went lame at the end , so my vet was right in his judgement..
Bobthecob15
Well-Known Member
Exactly, saying pass or fail doesn't exist any more...a seller could argue that the horse was sound etc if no health issues and refuse to give you your deposit back ...but they may not be suitable for your intended purpose according to the vet. Which is why it's so important to discuss with the vet what you intend to do with the horse.
Orangehorse
Well-Known Member
Some sellers don't want to know why the horse didn't "pass" as they can then say to the next potential purchaser, I think it's 100% sound and open to any vet. Who knows, the next vet might pass it - it happens.
So as a purchaser, I think the fairest thing to say is that, after the vetting and following the vet's advice you don't think it is suitable.
So as a purchaser, I think the fairest thing to say is that, after the vetting and following the vet's advice you don't think it is suitable.
Sossigpoker
Well-Known Member
Tbf pass or fail has never existed. The vet either states that the purchase of the horse represents acceptable levels of risk , or it doesn't. I.e the horse is recommended for purchase for the intended use or not.
Christmas Crumpet
Well-Known Member
I had a horse vetted a couple of years ago and she wasnt cheap. She was noticeably lame on a tight circle on the hard ground and when she was trotted up, you could hear she wasn’t quite sound. Vet did actually fail her - he said he couldn’t issue a vets certificate for her as she was lame. Owner went bonkers and said it was only an advisory. I rang vet back and he said quite clearly, horse is lame. She failed the vet
SussexbytheXmasTree
Well-Known Member
I’m not sure it’s entirely true that horses never fail a vetting. Twice I’ve had a vet recommend that they don’t proceed further with a vetting because of issues. First was a horse that came up very crooked on the lameness exam. The vet recommended that we didn’t proceed further. The second the vet thought they detected a heart arrhythmia and stopped the vetting. As I really liked the horse further in-depth tests were done outside the vetting (owner arranged and paid) and he was ok so he was re-vetted a week or so later and passed. I could have walked away at that point though.
Glitter's fun
Well-Known Member
I don't agree that vettings used to be a simple pass or fail .
I bought an "aged" retired eventer in 1987. She passed the vetting "bearing in mind the comments below". (Comments were that although she went sound on the day there appeared to be arthritis in her knees & she might be up to 20 years old. She was passed because a light rider intended to use her as dressage schoolmistress & for light hacking.)
She was sound (and very keen! ) for many years.
I bought an "aged" retired eventer in 1987. She passed the vetting "bearing in mind the comments below". (Comments were that although she went sound on the day there appeared to be arthritis in her knees & she might be up to 20 years old. She was passed because a light rider intended to use her as dressage schoolmistress & for light hacking.)
She was sound (and very keen! ) for many years.
ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Horses are definitely routinely failed, usually by halting the vetting early, for heart problems and lameness, and always have been.
.
.
Sossigpoker
Well-Known Member
Vets don't use the terms pass or fail. They stop the vetting after stage 2 (or even earlier) if issues such as lameness are observed. Those issues make the horse unsuitable for the purpose as the purchase represents unacceptable levels of risk.
But as the vetting isn't a test , they don't use terms pass or fail. My old horse had a mild roar but was found suitable for the purpose of "ladies hack ". But for 3 day eventing the purchase would have been too risky.
When sellers say "passed 5 stage vetting 3 months ago " , that means absolutely nothing. As the horse could have been vetted for the use of , say , hacking, but if I wanted that horse for 3 day eventing , then that vetting would be useless.
I just get annoyed with terms pass or fail ,.just incorrect info being passed around, much like DIY eye treatments and how carrots are bad for horses ??
Cortez
Tough but Fair
ALL vettings are advisory - it is up to the buyer as to whether or not they take the vet's advice. The horse may fail the vet - it may be as lame as a duck on all four legs, and the buyer is entitled to buy the horse anyway. What the buyer cannot then do is return the horse as unsound, or sue the vet or owner for selling them a horse which they were advised was unsound, or attempt to insure said horse for unsoundnesses noted on the vetting.
ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Vets don't use the terms pass or fail. They stop the vetting after stage 2 (or even earlier) if issues such as lameness are observed. Those issues make the horse unsuitable for the purpose as the purchase represents unacceptable levels of risk.
But as the vetting isn't a test , they don't use terms pass or fail. My old horse had a mild roar but was found suitable for the purpose of "ladies hack ". But for 3 day eventing the purchase would have been too risky.
When sellers say "passed 5 stage vetting 3 months ago " , that means absolutely nothing. As the horse could have been vetted for the use of , say , hacking, but if I wanted that horse for 3 day eventing , then that vetting would be useless.
I just get annoyed with terms pass or fail ,.just incorrect info being passed around, much like DIY eye treatments and how carrots are bad for horses ??
For me and most people I know, a vetting stopped because of lameness, heart arrhythmia, etc is a fail no matter what word a vet may or may not use.
The buyer can still choose to buy, of course, but I don't know anyone who would not describe that situation as a horse failing the vet.
I don't understand how you think it compares with incorrect advice given by non vets about feeding or medical treatment.
Sossigpoker
Well-Known Member
Those are just examples of things passed around that irritate me, that's all. ??
The reason why I hate the terms pass and fail is that most people think that a "failed " horse is irreparable or that a "passed" horse is sound and healthy.
As per my example of sellers saying "passed a 5 stage vet 3 months ago ". It's misleading and pointless.
ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
I have to admit I am confused as to why you feel so strongly about this. I don't find "passed a 5 stage 3 months ago" remotely misleading. It means that the horse was deemed fit for the purpose the buyer wanted it for 3 months ago. I don't vet horses myself, but if someone could produce a clean vet certificate 3 months old I wouldn't consider that pointless, especially if they also had a good reason why the horse was for sale.
I also don't agree with you that most people think that a "failed" horse is irreparable. You will, for example, often read on here that a horse that a forum member wants to buy has failed the vet but, for examples, is being reshod and presented to the vet again next week; or that they are going to buy it anyway because they are happy that it is an issue which they can sort out.
Now if you want to start getting bent out of shape about calling it a 5 star, not a 5 stage, I might join you
.
.
I also don't agree with you that most people think that a "failed" horse is irreparable. You will, for example, often read on here that a horse that a forum member wants to buy has failed the vet but, for examples, is being reshod and presented to the vet again next week; or that they are going to buy it anyway because they are happy that it is an issue which they can sort out.
Now if you want to start getting bent out of shape about calling it a 5 star, not a 5 stage, I might join you
..