Vettings and viewings - etiquette?

A

Abacus

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 February 2011
Messages
2,642
Visit site
This is in relation to a horse at my yard, not mine - I am just curious.

If there has been a viewing which goes well to the point that the buyer wants to organise a vetting, does the owner then cancel all subsequent viewings even if say they are the next day and well in advance of the vetting? Or do they continue from the perspective that the buyer may still pull out, and that of course the horse may fail (but then may pass another vet at another time). It seems uncomfortable to lose other potential buyers in advance of a vetting but of course this isn't a totally transparent way to operate. A deposit hasn't been taken so there is no security from the first buyer.

What is correct, and what do others actually do?
 
Totally up to the owner. I used to stopped viewings once I accepted an offer subject to vetting but got messed around alot by people then just not getting one organised. So then for Dolly I took a deposit to stop viewings, refundable if the horse failed. Many dealers will carry on offering viewings until the horse has been paid for. Others will stop viewings once a vetting has been paid for. Others may well chooe to sell to someone who does not want to vet, even if the horse is under offer with a vetting booked. It feels harsh but at the same time buyers are so fickle, lots of vets fail horses on fairly spurious grounds and at the end of the day it's a business for someone and a gauaranteed £5K today is atrractive for a horse who might fail a vet next week. Even if the seller has no reason to be concerned about the horse.

I'd not be a horse dealer for all the tea in China.
 
Ambers Echo said:
Totally up to the owner. I used to stopped viewings once I accepted an offer subject to vetting but got messed around alot by people then just not getting one organised. So then for Dolly I took a deposit to stop viewings, refundable if the horse failed. Many dealers will carry on offering viewings until the horse has been paid for. Others will stop viewings once a vetting has been paid for. Others may well chooe to sell to someone who does not want to vet, even if the horse is under offer with a vetting booked. It feels harsh but at the same time buyers are so fickle, lots of vets fail horses on fairly spurious grounds and at the end of the day it's a business for someone and a gauaranteed £5K today is atrractive for a horse who might fail a vet next week. Even if the seller has no reason to be concerned about the horse.

I'd not be a horse dealer for all the tea in China.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the reasoning behind carrying on viewings and I'm glad that 'we' at the yard aren't the only ones thinking like this. I would add to it that vettings are so easy to fail and hard to pass that having a backup buyer 2 for a second vetting isn't ridiculous. Of course if the horse is clearly dog lame there is no point trying a second vetting, but something very minor or subjective might not be pointed out next time. I know one horse who recently failed and then passed 5 stage vettings in the same week.
 
Peglo said:
Since we’re on the subject of etiquette, did the seller tell the second person the horse had failed a vetting? Or should they have?
Click to expand...
I would say that it's more "ethics" than "etiquette". My friend once vetted a very nice (expensive) horse that failed the vetting majorly. She offered to share the x-rays and resulting report with the owner. They declined and kept advertising the horse as "perfectly sound". That is just straight-out unethical behaviour. And also, imo, against the best interests of the horse.
 
Peglo said:
Since we’re on the subject of etiquette, did the seller tell the second person the horse had failed a vetting? Or should they have?
Click to expand...

They did not. This is why:

The first failure was minor and the seller thought might have been because the horse trod on a stone the day before (was sore for a few yards) and was also shod that morning. The vet said he had a suspicion of the front left (the one that trod on a stone) but also said that it was not lame (really no idea what that means). The seller felt that it was quite likely a very short term issue if any at all and that the horse had a good chance of passing. It would also lead to a biased second vetting if the vet was made aware of something: they would be more likely to look at that limb until they found something, and they are almost bound to note it, even if just to cover themselves. If we believe that vettings are generally accurate and consistent even between different vets, if there was a problem the second vet would also have seen it without being shown where to look (and if they did, yes there is a certain unfairness in letting the second buyer pay for a vetting - but they didn't).

Curly_Feather said:
I would say that it's more "ethics" than "etiquette". My friend once vetted a very nice (expensive) horse that failed the vetting majorly. She offered to share the x-rays and resulting report with the owner. They declined and kept advertising the horse as "perfectly sound". That is just straight-out unethical behaviour. And also, imo, against the best interests of the horse.
Click to expand...

Agree. I am not talking about definite failures of this kind really, more something that is minor, subjective or 'on the day' as above. And FWIW this is a very different type of horse (and in this case definitely more ethics than etiquette). But sadly I do think that many sellers and not only dealers would keep on trying to sell the horse until someone buys it even if they know of a definite problem.
 
I always put a 10% deposit down if I want the horse not to be shown anyone else prior to vetting. I then organise a vetting so I have a date within 24 hours, so the seller knows I am serious. I try to make the actual vetting within the week and hopefully am there for vetting to pay and take the same day, or the day after if it is a long way away.
 
People will have a variety of opinions on this.

Viewing wise, if I was the first viewer/buyer and was potentially going to get gazumped, I'd want the opportunity to put a holding deposit down
Viewing wise, if I was the second viewer I would want to know the situation and decide for myself if I still wanted to view - it would depend on distance and keen-ness on the horse
As a seller I'd advise the viewers per above most likely, although if my gut feel from early interactions was that viewer two might be more suitable I'd advise viewer one that I wanted to let viewer two try before they booked vet

Vettings wise - it would completely depend on what the failure was and whether I agreed with it or not. I have seen so many contradictory vettings, opinions etc that I'm a bit meh about the whole thing. Personally, these days I'd get a good vet I trust to pre-vet the horse for me, and I'd use that as the basis of discussion with potential buyers.
 
There is no correct. Everything depends on the circumstance and your own views.

Option 1 - you stop all further viewings without a deposit
Option 2 - you take a 10% deposit to stop other viewings only refundable if the vet states the horse is not suitable for the purpose intended
Option 3 - you let viewer 2 know that someone would like the horse vetted but you would be willing to negotiate the price if they want to view and collect tomorrow...
 
Abacus said:
This is exactly the reasoning behind carrying on viewings and I'm glad that 'we' at the yard aren't the only ones thinking like this. I would add to it that vettings are so easy to fail and hard to pass that having a backup buyer 2 for a second vetting isn't ridiculous. Of course if the horse is clearly dog lame there is no point trying a second vetting, but something very minor or subjective might not be pointed out next time. I know one horse who recently failed and then passed 5 stage vettings in the same week.
Click to expand...
I’m having a horse vetted tomorrow 🤞
 
i paid a deposit for lily, and the seller cancelled the other viewings - to me, that’s the purpose of a deposit.

if i was selling, id also cancel any viewings if id received a deposit, if no deposit paid horse is still on the market to be viewed, regardless of if theres a vetting booked.
 
I have just been monumentally messed around with this this week.

Selling a 4 year old pony. He’s not expensive - because he’s 4 and green.
Multiple viewings booked in. People came and liked him, viewed twice over two days and put a deposit down subject to vet. We cancelled the other viewings.
They dragged their feet on the vet then said they were having it weds but could their instructor come see him Tuesday. Reluctantly agreed because what else can you do. Pony went well but instructor said she thought they would be better off with a Welsh pony.
Phone call the next day to say they didn’t want him because they wanted to get a Welsh B instead on recommendation of instructor.

They did NOT get their deposit back, all this messing about took over a week and has taken us to the end of the holidays nearly. In future, it will be a case of booking the vet within 24 hours of deposit, or I’ll keep taking viewings.

Pony has now been re advertised ‘due to timewasters’ but people get suspicious that it’s failed the vet and it’s much harder to sell them.
 
I have just sold a horse. I took 10 percent deposit, to be returned if the horse failed the vetting. He had 3 more viewings organised but all were cancelled after the deposit was taked. It took a week to get the horse vetted because x rays were required. He went to his new home 2 days after that.

If no deposit was provided I would not have cancelled any viewings. Until a deposit is received the horse remains for sale.
 
I am quite simple - depending on price i either vet or don't - so circa 8K and above - vet with x rays - but put a 10% deposit down and also arrange vetting at the viewing - unless its a weekend or at silly o clock on a day, then I arrange as soon as is possible - usually have to have vets recommended as I buy out of my local area. . Less than 8K - I turn up with the horse box and take on the day of viewing.
 
As a seller, I would make it clear to a prospective buyer that the horse needs to be "sold subject to vet" with a deposit. It's not held for a vetting and then sold, it needs to be a commitment to buy subject to the vetting results being acceptable. I'd also go through what they expected to do with the horse, what purpose they are vetting for and whether it's a 2 stage or full. If I am happy that the horse would be in a good home, with a serious buyer, and I have no reason to suspect that the horse wouldn't fly through the vetting, then I would cancel appointments.

If the person is interested, wants a vetting but doesn't want to commit, I wouldn't cancel further appointments but I'd make it clear to the potential buyer that the horse is still on the market.

If the horse fails the vetting for the purpose that is required then I would take it off the market and address the issues or reduce the price and be transparent about the vetting, or sell for a different purpose.

If the failure is obscure, and my vet can't find the issue - which has happened to a friend of mine, when one vet said the horse had a cataract forming and two other independent vets couldn't find it - then I'd make a call based on the facts.
 
I always take the horse off the market once someone has made an offer subject to vetting. I don’t bother with a deposit, although I think it’s ok to ask for one.
I def don’t carry on with viewings once someone has booked a vetting as that’s a waste of everyone’s time. What if another person came all the way, wanted to buy the horse, but you have the other person’s vetting organised so you can’t let them have it? And you can’t tell them it’s having a vetting as you then can’t get back in touch if it fails. I would just say I’ve got enough viewings lined up over the next week or two but I’ll call you if he’s still available.

And no, I never tell other people if it fails. Number one: I wouldn’t have it for sale if it has something seriously wrong with it, so whatever it is would be a minor thing that another vet may not pick up on.
 
If no deposit paid then I believe normal etiquette is to crack on with viewings as one of them may buy on the spot or original buyer may pull out. I guess this would be at seller discretion though

If buyer pays a deposit then any further viewings should be cancelled and buyer should be given a timeframe that vetting is expected to be completed in.

Someone else buying the horse is a risk you take if you don’t put a deposit down. (& I personally wouldn’t go as far as booking a vetting without putting one down to hold the horse due to that risk)
 
I've always done sold subject to vetting and cancelled all viewings when I was buying or selling. I wouldn't go and see a horse that could be sold the next day before the vet had a chance to get there and I also wouldn't go and see a horse that was already sold subject to vetting.

Personally if I was selling then I would cancel viewings because chances are I don't want a load of people I don't know turning up and riding my horse, especially just before it's vetted.
 
Abacus said:
This is in relation to a horse at my yard, not mine - I am just curious.

If there has been a viewing which goes well to the point that the buyer wants to organise a vetting, does the owner then cancel all subsequent viewings even if say they are the next day and well in advance of the vetting? Or do they continue from the perspective that the buyer may still pull out, and that of course the horse may fail (but then may pass another vet at another time). It seems uncomfortable to lose other potential buyers in advance of a vetting but of course this isn't a totally transparent way to operate. A deposit hasn't been taken so there is no security from the first buyer.

What is correct, and what do others actually do?
Click to expand...
I think it would be fine to continue having others seeing the horse. Until money passes hands, a thing isn't sold, whatever that thing might be - house, horse, mouse... whatever.
 
ester said:
If I was booked to view before someone else’s vetting I’d want to be able to make the decision myself as to whether I still wanted to view
Click to expand...
Me too. I'd want the owner to be up front that there was someone who had already seen the horse and liked it and would possibly buy it, but 'If you would like to come in any case," the owner could say, blah blah. A lot depends on what the seller thinks of the first would-be buyer. And the second would-be buyer. In short, I think people should be up-front but not jump to conclusions as to what might happen.
 
First Frost said:
I have just sold a horse. I took 10 percent deposit, to be returned if the horse failed the vetting. He had 3 more viewings organised but all were cancelled after the deposit was taked. It took a week to get the horse vetted because x rays were required. He went to his new home 2 days after that.

If no deposit was provided I would not have cancelled any viewings. Until a deposit is received the horse remains for sale.
Click to expand...
I think the horse has been sold only after all the money has been received. Or have I been watching too much Judge Judy?
 
Squeak said:
I've always done sold subject to vetting and cancelled all viewings when I was buying or selling. I wouldn't go and see a horse that could be sold the next day before the vet had a chance to get there and I also wouldn't go and see a horse that was already sold subject to vetting.

Personally if I was selling then I would cancel viewings because chances are I don't want a load of people I don't know turning up and riding my horse, especially just before it's vetted.
Click to expand...
Exactly this. Deposit paid, cancel other viewings until the vetting has happened.
 
Peglo said:
Since we’re on the subject of etiquette, did the seller tell the second person the horse had failed a vetting? Or should they have?
Click to expand...
Good one!

No, I don't think so. Because it isn't pass or fail, now. It is whether it is suitable for the intended purchaser. So a horse might not be suitable for a 30 day hunting season, but might be OK for a gentle hack.

However, I guess something serious like eyesight or heart condition, it would be up the to the honesty of the seller.
 
ihatework said:
People will have a variety of opinions on this.

Viewing wise, if I was the first viewer/buyer and was potentially going to get gazumped, I'd want the opportunity to put a holding deposit down
Viewing wise, if I was the second viewer I would want to know the situation and decide for myself if I still wanted to view - it would depend on distance and keen-ness on the horse
As a seller I'd advise the viewers per above most likely, although if my gut feel from early interactions was that viewer two might be more suitable I'd advise viewer one that I wanted to let viewer two try before they booked vet

Vettings wise - it would completely depend on what the failure was and whether I agreed with it or not. I have seen so many contradictory vettings, opinions etc that I'm a bit meh about the whole thing. Personally, these days I'd get a good vet I trust to pre-vet the horse for me, and I'd use that as the basis of discussion with potential buyers.
Click to expand...
Getting a pre vetting sounds like a very good idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top