Vetting full loan horse?

[misswinter]

Just wondering people opinion on vetting a horse on full loan.

Which would be better 2 or 5 star?

Or simply involving a clause in the contract saying the horse is sound at time of loan or listing any know issues, predispositions etc and then if any medical issues arrise that can be backdated these would be at the fee of the owner?

Thanks

 

[Smogul]

I am not sure I understand what you are asking. If the loan horse becomes unsound, you can simply terminate the loan, assuming you give whatever notice period is required by the contract.

 

[dodgers89]

I didn't get my loan horse vetted. If there had been an issue with him, the owners would have been in breach of contract and would have either had to take him back or pay and vets bills

 

[Goya]

Make sure you have a proper written contract in place stating everything necessary.BHS website has a format you can use.

 

[misswinter]

Great thanks, wasn't sure I could terminate the contract as say the horse develops an illness the owner could swear blind it had never been the case prior to me loaning or was unaware etc and leave me to foot the bill as I couldn't prove when the illness started.

 

[ihatework]

Horses get ill, it's a fact of life.
Presumably you will fully insure said loan horse for vets fees?
I think it's reasonable to expect the owner to foot the bill for any pre-existing conditions, but new diagnosis should really be covered by the loaner.

 

[PorkChop]

I wouldn't get a horse vetted that I was going to loan, unless there was a possibility of buying it in the future.

Make sure you insure it and have a clear and concise contract. Horses go wrong, make sure both you and the loaner are clear on what would happen in most common eventualities, and also make it very clear the proceedure if either of you want to terminate the contract.

 

[ropa]

I have had a horse on loan and I was not responsible for any of the vet bills. In fact, I wouldn't take on a horse on loan where I was responsible! i think there are very few circumstances where it would be the loaners fault and therefore it would be the loaner's responsibility. E.g. the horse is kicked in the field, cushings, I personally think are the owners responsibility. If I was reckless with the horse and it became lame through overwork tendon issue or something then I would pay

 

[Tiddlypom]

Personally, I would get a loan horse vetted prior to taking them on loan. Probably a 2 stage would suffice.

I have recently had to return (very amicably) my elderly Cushings' loan mare, as she re-aggravated an old suspensory injury whilst hooning around in the field here, a fortnight after I took her on. I had her for a month, and forked out a lot of money (c£200) getting her rubbish shoeing, sharp teeth, feather mites and mud fever sorted out, plus the vet visit for the injury. Not to mention her two prascend tablets a day habit, @£1 a pop.

I'd didn't have her checked out by the vet prior to loan, as she was only intended for gentle pootling about on the lanes.

She was a lovely horse, and would have been perfect, but in the end, the only time she was ridden was when i tried her out . (Her owner is lovely too, but inexperienced). She was still lame after a week's box rest and bute, so has gone back to the owner to be turned out in the hope she comes sound eventually.

Definitely, whatever you do, get a robust loan agreement in place.

In retrospect, all I would have done differently is to get her vetted first.

 

[russianhorse]

I never saw the point of vetting a loan horse, simply because something happens or the owners have forgotten to mention something, then the horse just goes back

However my friend has just loaned her horse, and the yard to where he was due to go demanded he had a 5 stage vetting before the loan commenced

I had never heard of this, but apparently it's becoming quite common according to the vet :/

 

[Maesfen]

I have had a horse on loan and I was not responsible for any of the vet bills. In fact, I wouldn't take on a horse on loan where I was responsible! i think there are very few circumstances where it would be the loaners fault and therefore it would be the loaner's responsibility. E.g. the horse is kicked in the field, cushings, I personally think are the owners responsibility. If I was reckless with the horse and it became lame through overwork tendon issue or something then I would pay

I wouldn't let you loan a horse from me if that is your attitude! Providing there was no previous condition, I fail to see why a horse getting kicked in the field (or anywhere for that matter) while out on loan would be the responsibility of the owner. Once you've taken the loan on (with a contract to both owner and loaner's satisfaction) then surely the horse would be your responsibility whatever happened to it, after all, you're the one looking after it so anything that happens to it is outside the owner's control?
I might add, that if one of mine goes out on loan, I pay the insurance, even the vet cover but I do ask the loaner to pay any excess if it's needed and to keep vaccinations up to date;I don't think that's too bad as they do have full use to do what they like with the horse.

 

[misswinter]

That's interesting I was under the impression I'd be paying the insurance, excess etc myself as assumed was part of parcel on the full responsibility not that I mind either way. Think I'll go against any vetting but if I decide to considering buying in the future would get it vetted
Thanks everyone

 

[Maesfen]

Some owners do want you to pay for the insurance so do check for sure but to me, my horse, my responsibility (less the excess) plus being miserly, if anyone should get the payout if the worst happens then it should be me, the owner IMHO. There was a thread a while ago about it, that loaner paid the insurance but owner wanted the money even though they had not intended to insure the horse themselves and loaner was saying virtually, on your bike whereas most of us said, IIRC, to be fair, the horse hadn't belonged to them so they should at least either give half or the remains from the premium paid; not sure how it finished TBH, was only a month or so ago if you search.

 

[paulineh]

My feelings about getting a loan horse vetted are, the horse is the responsibility of the owner and anything that has happened prior to the horse going out on loan is that of the owner.

The person loaning the horse should be made aware of any predisposing problems. By the owner paying the insurance they have the hold on the horse and can know what is going on. I would keep paying the insurance but get the OP to pay the excess. What happens once that horse is with the OP then it is their responsibility ,a horse getting kicked in the field or getting colic etc

as for getting a vetting I'm not sure I would do that.

 

[Kaylum]

I treat the horse as if it was my own, I would pay the insurance if I loaned I would not expect the owner to pay it so I would get a 2 stage vetting done as I have done before. I loan the horse so I am responsible for its well being.

 

[Smogul]

I treat the horse as if it was my own, I would pay the insurance if I loaned I would not expect the owner to pay it so I would get a 2 stage vetting done as I have done before. I loan the horse so I am responsible for its well being.

Don't disagree with you in one way. However, when my horse developed a problem when she was out on loan, I wanted her home so she could be seen by my own vet who knew her. She wasn't insured as her age and existing medical issues made it very expensive and pretty pointless as almost everything was excluded. Fortunately the problem turned out to be fairly minor and she went back out on loan to the same person.