Watchdog!

[digitalangel]

I think the difference between private sellers and dealers like David is that private sellers usually know the horse quite well, where i think Davids business model is to get them in and sold asap and you cant know what kind of horse youre selling if its only on site for a short amount of time. Davids risk in this case is that he doesnt know the horses that well, and goes on what his seller tells him which could be rubbish or might be true but the crux is he doesnt check for himself things that can and should be checked.

Every the eternal optimist i want to think the best of David, but having read through the press articles/etc from last time around and also in the forum archive here, it seems for the most part, he has not learned from his past mistakes. In the 2005 WD investigation horses were also sold a lot younger than they actually were and passports didnt match. It seems the passport issue has been resolved and well done David for that, but i cant put a lot of this down to ignorance on his part because david has been selling horses for a long time, and while theres a numpty to thinks they can get a saint with no medical issues for under 1000 pounds David will still be in business.

 

[TrasaM]

He has not learned from his mistakes because he does not consider that they were mistakes. His only mistake will have been being caught out. Leopards and spots etc.
This is a cynical exercise in cashing in on trust and naivety of ill informed buyers. These type of people are ripe for the plucking. We also live in a society where people will tend to trust those who set themselves up as knowledgeable dealers in the mistaken idea that they get a full refund, as they would with any other commodity, as they are dealing with an apparently genuine seller.

I'm sorry but I'm not buying any of Mr Thomases remorse or suave explanations or excuses.

 

[Nancykitt]

I agree that a private seller should know the horse much better than a dealer - I was just making the point that private sellers can sometimes be just as unscrupulous as the worst dealers. In my case a refund would not have been an option (or rather, I would have had a real battle on my hands).

Again, not defending any wrongdoing, but let's acknowledge that:
- just because an organisation has been singled out by Watchdog it doesn't mean that it's the worst of the worst. I know of some so-called dealers who really do mistreat horses and will carry on doing so because they just happened not to get the BBC on their doorstep
- not all vets are equally competent (and there are some that I wouldn't allow within 100 yards of my lads)
- while some members of the public are just naive sitting targets and it's easy to take advantage of them (like me 10 years ago), others are complete idiots who want everything for next to nothing.

Unscrupulous behaviour in buying and selling horses is incredibly common. This is not a reason to deal out punishment where it's due, but to me there is little mileage in demonising an individual as a means of solving a longer term and more widely spread problem.

 

[Suechoccy]

I know some local people who deal in similar horses to KC and I've recently bought a fantastic young pony from them. They offer two weeks trial on a deposit only basis and are very honest about their horses. But they still get horses returned simply because some idiots think you can get a perfectly behaved schoolmaster, suitable for complete beginners, for £1500.

Indeedy. I have a friend who worked at a dealer specialising in similar horses. They offered a 2-week refund period, or a longer-term swop-it-for-another. All the neds were about 1.5-2k and there were lots of neds, mainly cob types. Some customers went through 4-5 neds to find their preferred ned. These customers were called the "Special" customers. The dealer didn't mind, he had their 2k in the bank and it didn't matter which horse the customer had. The customers were happy "because the dealer's so nice because he's happy to swap this ned for another ned". It was down to the customer to get the horse vetted (or not) before buying.

If I bought a horse from a dealer for around 1.5k, I'd expect some problems to sort out, be they behavioural, schooling, health, etc.

As for the earlier comments about Flaxen being in-foal, that can be the case with any mare no matter whether bought privately, from auction, from a dealer. I bought a mare one autumn about 14 years ago from a top class dealer. The mare was young, been put to a stallion, scanned not-in-foal, so backed and sold (and vetted with vet believing not-in-foal) ...the following April, out popped a foal.

As another couple of posters have said, if you want to buy a horse, you go with your eyes open, whether it's a dealer or private, you take someone knowledgeable with you, you see it ridden first before you ride it (if it's a riding horse), you perhaps try it on a couple of days, you have an independent vetting before you bring it home or during a trial period, you don't expect young horses to be novice rides/100pc behaved (because they're young), and you don't expect to buy a perfect-in-all-respects horse for a grand.

 

[lastchancer]

Rogue traders wouldn't be trading if there wasn't a market for them. People looking for a new horse, car etc, shouldn't make themselves vulnerable in the first place.
Be vigilant, do your homework before purchase.

What a strange attitude to take - Yes people should do more research before buying a horse, and I know it's difficult to find sympathy for those who, for example buy unseen off the net.

But that hardly excuses someone knowingly selling lame/dangerous horses now does it?

David Thomas I don't believe for one second that he can't age a young horse
accurately, or identify a sick,lame, lazy or unridable animal.

It's a sad advert for our sport when new comers get ridiculed for falling for a scammer like Thomas.

If you took your car to a garage and they told you a pack of lies about work that needed doing would that then be your fault for not been an expert in mechanics?

 

[Janeuk1]

In answer, the original complaint was made by Jane Arkle who purchased two horses from us, she came and tried both at length at our premises and found both suitable, she then agreed to buy both horses at £4000. We transported both to London area for £200 which was less than cost. Jane then changed her mind and returned both horses at her expense and we refunded her the full £4000, not as Watchdog stated £3500. I believe Ms Arkle was of the opinion we should have refunded all her out of pocket expenses despite the fact the horses were not at fault.

Regards

David

well I have missed out on quite a lot of over the weekend!

I would just like to say - The horses were not tried at length at the premises - as stated on a very early post, the weather conditions and facilities meant this was not possible on the day. However, as with having a two week window to try them I took the risk to give them a full try and get them vetted at our own yard. (to visit Kellys cobs was a 6 hour round trip so didn't want to do this three times before making a decision - and before the critisism comes in, I know this is not really the wise thing to do)

Just for clarification, they were not transported to London, I live in Cheshire.
I was not refunded in full. You deducted the £200 'admin' fee and I lost my transport costs, which were £100 to our yard and £180 return. (despite Monty being unsuitable due to health)

Once I found out about Monty's sensory ligament injury I let you know. I told you everything I had been told from his previous owner, length of recovery (12+ months) etc and that he was sold on to the lady who you purchased him from as a light hack (she was fully aware of his injury). I spoke to my Vet who was of the opinion that such an injury would be likely to re-occur if used for regular jumping. (I also did a lot of research about that type of injury, just incase my Vet was being over cautious!) On this basis I didnt go ahead with a full vetting as she explained that the injury could very easily be missed on a vetting as the damage is inside. My daughter was obviously upset as he was a lovely horse but she wanted to jump.
You paid £500 for him (he was a part exchange) and he was advertised for sale at £1995. The lady you bought him off did say you were not aware of his injury as you asked NOTHING about him.
I offered you a reduced price of £800 to keep as a light hack because I felt so bad about my daughter being upset. You refused, which is totally within your right.
I returned Monty and Ed (Ed had nothing wrong with him, although he was aged wrongly - he was just unsuitable for my novice husband)
It was after this you became quite difficult. You dragged out returning my money and then refunded less than I was owed initially. You then wouldnt tell me when you would pay the remainder. When I said it wasnt acceptable and talked about legal proceedings, you responded by saying something along the line of 'well I might as well keep the money and go to court then.
It wasnt until I asked about your previous convictions (horse imports and puppy paradise) that you returned the rest of my money (still less the admin fees). This was after you said I was dishonest and willingly upset my daughter by trying to get a brilliant horse at a reduced price (I had sent you the vet records detailing the injury!)
If you had been polite and responsive about my refund, I would never have got in touch with the BBC as I gave you the benefit of the doubt regarding your awareness of the injury and I accepted that with Ed he was just unsuitable - I wasnt out to put all the blame on you (David), but you became unpleasant when you had to refund me and had me a nervous wreck (it was bad enough losing the admin fees and transport costs without losing another couple of hundred just because you didnt want to give it me back!)

I have to say David, you are coming across very well in your replies - as you did when we came to view the horses at Kelly's cobs, I think someone mentioned it before, but you are wasted as a horse dealer. You should have taken up a career in politics.

I admit I was reluctant to go on to the watchdog programme, I knew that I'd be subject to negative comments for my mistakes - I was talked in to it (cos I'm soft) by the programme after being informed of many other cases they had reports of. That doesnt detract from the fact I did have a very unpleasant experience from Kelly's cobs after I returned the horses.

 

[Nancykitt]

To be honest, I can't see this discussion going anywhere now...it looks like the two main parties involved have some fundamental disagreements and the forum is not really the place to sort this. Whether or not we liked or disliked the Watchdog coverage of the issue, the fact remains that Watchdog is a powerful force that will influence the perception of many.

And yes, buyers do have to beware, under all circumstances. The car analogy is, IMO, not a great one - but if you went to a garage and expected a wonderful, reliable, economical car for not a lot of money then yes, you are likely to get stung. All you can do is to find out about traders - of any description - who are reputable and take it from there. For example, our horsebox broke down on the motorway last year and the firm that came to recover it said that they would repair it but it would cost £2000. Now I don't know anything about clutches but it sounded like a lot of money to me. A few phone calls confirmed that I could get the work done for around £300. So yes, had I gone ahead and got fleeced, it would have been partly my fault for not doing the homework.
Sad that we live in such times, but there you are.

 

[JandP]

And yes, buyers do have to beware, under all circumstances. The car analogy is, IMO, not a great one - but if you went to a garage and expected a wonderful, reliable, economical car for not a lot of money then yes, you are likely to get stung. All you can do is to find out about traders - of any description - who are reputable and take it from there. For example, our horsebox broke down on the motorway last year and the firm that came to recover it said that they would repair it but it would cost £2000. Now I don't know anything about clutches but it sounded like a lot of money to me. A few phone calls confirmed that I could get the work done for around £300. So yes, had I gone ahead and got fleeced, it would have been partly my fault for not doing the homework.
Sad that we live in such times, but there you are.

Ah!! Sense!! This is exactly what I am saying, these 'perfect' horses do NOT exist for such a small amount of money (in fact they don't really exist for ANY amount of money), and I don't care what people say, you will not find these 'perfect' horses in a dealers yard. People need to open their eyes - horses are horses, not machines.

And selling a horse as a 'light hack only' with an old injury to a dealers yard...give me a break. Easier on the conscience than putting the poor horse down probably. If you do this, you have no right to be outraged by where the poor horse ends up.

I think Jane, you may mean 'suspensory' injury rather than 'sensory'?? But I can guarantee you that Kelly's Cobs is not the only person you will find who won't disclose injuries of this nature. Just like half the young horses that have had their OCD chips removed to give them clean x-rays....no one tells you about that either!

Buyer beware, that is the moral of the story. And it has been since the dawn of time, when people were selling horses! This is not a new thing, in fact it is one of the first things I ever learnt about horses!

 

[Janeuk1]

Yes JandP and do mean suspensory (oops)

Personally, I would never be anything but honest when selling an animal and the fact that this can't be said of many sellers, private or dealers, won't change that fact. Fortunately, the horses I own now are all very much loved and well cared for. Not without any problems or issues, but nothing I cant handle and improve on (all are fairly young). So for me it has all ended well so I think I will stop following this thread... it just winds me up lol

 

[Polos Mum]

JaneUK1 - any dealer, even top notch will charge you transport costs, if I buy something from Next or Amazon and return it I'm out of pocket by the delivery costs.

If all you're out of pocket is a £200 admin fee I'd say you got off very lightly compared to lots and lots of people on here who end up stuck with a horse that they can't do anything with or sell genuinely. £200 is less than a single vetting which I'd expect to loose several times over when searching for two horses.

I'm not saying it's right by any stretch if the admin fee wasn't disclosed to you in the sale contract - but not sure I'd have got the TV involved for £200.

 

[Janeuk1]

Polos mum - I think you are missing the point. Had David refunded all I was owed straight away when I returned the horses (less the admin fees) There wouldnt have been an issue. As soon as David refunded my money (again less the admin fees) I was more than happy to walk away. At no point did I complain about transport costs Or the deduction of admin fees until I had problems getting the £3800 which was mine and David had no reason to not refund immediately.

I reported him when I was having problems getting the £3800 back. Like I said before I was reluctant to get involved with the programme when they contacted me months later because I had put it down to a bad experience and something I just wanted to move on from. (which I had until the programme was aired!)

 

[KellysCobs]

Polos mum - I think you are missing the point. Had David refunded all I was owed straight away when I returned the horses (less the admin fees) There wouldnt have been an issue. As soon as David refunded my money (again less the admin fees) I was more than happy to walk away. At no point did I complain about transport costs Or the deduction of admin fees until I had problems getting the £3800 which was mine and David had no reason to not refund immediately.

I reported him when I was having problems getting the £3800 back. Like I said before I was reluctant to get involved with the programme when they contacted me months later because I had put it down to a bad experience and something I just wanted to move on from. (which I had until the programme was aired!)

Jane, David here and firstly can I thank you for coming on and please dont feel I am wanting/willing or wishing to get into an argument with you, Im not. I thank you for clearing up about the old injury Monty had and that were not aware of it at the time, could you also clarify in the vets report that it stated if memory serves me correctly that he had fully recovered and was back to full health. I fully respect you having doubts over the injury and thats down to you but is it fair to say from a very clinical black and white point of view that yes there had been a injury years ago but he had made a full recovery. Also is it fair of me to say if Monty had been vetted with you at that time on the grounds of probability he would not have failed on the leg that had the old injury.

Thank you for stating Ed was fine but just not suitable for your purpose.

Could you also clear up exactly what I refunded as there was two refunds done to you and exactly how long they took.

Yes I agree Watchdog can be very pushy and could I also suggest without you there program would have been very limited and weak. Could you also elaborate on the other complaints they told you they had. I ask this as after reading your posts it appears you were possible bullied into appearing on false statements. As you can appreciate this is important to me as I have a similar tale from a previous owner of one of the horses they featured who was (in her words) bullied by them to repeat words suggested by them.

I am sorry if I came over unfriendly and will admit to feeling frustrated with you as I believed I sold you two great horses and your reasons for wanting to return them was not valid.

Regards

David

 

[KellysCobs]

Jane, David here and firstly can I thank you for coming on and please dont feel I am wanting/willing or wishing to get into an argument with you, Im not. I thank you for clearing up about the old injury Monty had and that were not aware of it at the time, could you also clarify in the vets report that it stated if memory serves me correctly that he had fully recovered and was back to full health. I fully respect you having doubts over the injury and thats down to you but is it fair to say from a very clinical black and white point of view that yes there had been a injury years ago but he had made a full recovery. Also is it fair of me to say if Monty had been vetted with you at that time on the grounds of probability he would not have failed on the leg that had the old injury.

Thank you for stating Ed was fine but just not suitable for your purpose.

Could you also clear up exactly what I refunded as there was two refunds done to you and exactly how long they took.

Yes I agree Watchdog can be very pushy and could I also suggest without you there program would have been very limited and weak. Could you also elaborate on the other complaints they told you they had. I ask this as after reading your posts it appears you were possible bullied into appearing on false statements. As you can appreciate this is important to me as I have a similar tale from a previous owner of one of the horses they featured who was (in her words) bullied by them to repeat words suggested by them.

I am sorry if I came over unfriendly and will admit to feeling frustrated with you as I believed I sold you two great horses and your reasons for wanting to return them was not valid.

Regards

David

Just another thought, could you kindly give the date of the horses return. Also would I have your permission to contact you directly as I would like to discuss this with you and I can assure you it will be very good natured and respectful.

Regards

David

 

[noodle_]

um wow reading this thread.....


i watched the programme and imo the main thing is get a vetting done (off any dealer.....!)

i personally have once bought from a very dodgy dealer (everything was 7, bay and came from ireland...!) horse was a psycho, we didnt have it vetted THIS IS NOT FROM KELLYS COBS!!! horse should have been shot but instead we had him re-schooled and sold to a happy hacker home


buyer beware........get a vetting done and novices shouldnt buy alone....dealers or private.

 

[KellysCobs]

Interesting development: This will all be backed up the affidavit statement for all relevant parties for those who are suggesting Im making all this up.

Just spoke at length to the riding school who sold us Queenie. This is the one Watchdog claimed we sold with a broken leg. The riding school have just confirmed they had been using the horse the day before they sold it to us and had used the horse extensively for a long period of time prior to that. They will also confirm as experienced horse people that Queenie was sold sound and had never shown any lameness with them. They will also confirm we paid £800.

To add I have asked a equine vet to look at the watchdog footage to see if he can spot anything.

 

[AmyMay]

What, you haven't asked Watchdog for copies of the vet report on the mare or the x-rays?

For someone so business savvy, you sound very inexperienced...................

 

[Suzie13]

I must say David is managing to come across very well on here. However I'm afraid none of it rings true here.

Having known David's ex partner and associate at the previous yards they ran, I'm well aware of the dodgy practices used. Not only do I know her personally but I also know other people that were employed at the time. I've heard many stories of horses being sold that were up to 15 years older than their actual ages, passports being purchased which were for dead horses and matched up to suit bloodlines buyers were looking for. Horses bought from the knackerman as unrideable advertised immediately as suitable family horses.

The list goes on. I have no personal issue here, never bought a horse from either of them, however it does make me angry to see a known conman manage to convince so many people.

I'm sorry but a leopard does not change it's spots.

 

[KellysCobs]

What, you haven't asked Watchdog for copies of the vet report on the mare or the x-rays?

For someone so business savvy, you sound very inexperienced...................

If you read my earlier posts you will see a copy of a email I sent to Watchdog, requesting copies of all vet reports, xrays and also permission to revet the horses. So far they have ignored my requests.

regards

David

 

[KellysCobs]

I must say David is managing to come across very well on here. However I'm afraid none of it rings true here.

Having known David's ex partner and associate at the previous yards they ran, I'm well aware of the dodgy practices used. Not only do I know her personally but I also know other people that were employed at the time. I've heard many stories of horses being sold that were up to 15 years older than their actual ages, passports being purchased which were for dead horses and matched up to suit bloodlines buyers were looking for. Horses bought from the knackerman as unrideable advertised immediately as suitable family horses.

The list goes on. I have no personal issue here, never bought a horse from either of them, however it does make me angry to see a known conman manage to convince so many people.

I'm sorry but a leopard does not change it's spots.

Can you provide any evidence of this or is this another case of stories you've heard? Sorry if I sound frustrated but this thread is full of heard from a friend story.

Regards

David

 

[Suzie13]

I'd prefer not to name names but I do know Dagmar personally, and have done so for a number of years.

 

[FabioandFreddy]

I am sorry if I came over unfriendly and will admit to feeling frustrated with you as I believed I sold you two great horses and your reasons for wanting to return them was not valid.

Regards

David

Sorry if i'm wrong on this - but i thought your policy allowed you to simply just change your mind and you could return less the admin fee? So no valid reason needed?! And no reason to get frustrated over your own policy?

 

[KellysCobs]

Sorry if i'm wrong on this - but i thought your policy allowed you to simply just change your mind and you could return less the admin fee? So no valid reason needed?! And no reason to get frustrated over your own policy?

http://kellyshorses.co.uk/page/SOLD WITH A TRIAL

 

[ihatework]

I don't know the dealer in question. I haven't purchased a horse from them or know anyone who has.

All I can say is that this particular dealer is presenting himself very well, both in the way he conducted himself on WD and in his response to various questions on this thread.

There are some horrific dealers in this country (I'm not saying this particular dealer is or isn't one of those) BUT what really annoys me - is that what could have been an outstanding watchdog exposure, has been turned into a complete and utter face through some very shoddy reporting.

 

[FabioandFreddy]

http://kellyshorses.co.uk/page/SOLD WITH A TRIAL

so you can then - you just were a bit miffed that they did?!

 

[s4sugar]

"or is not as described at time of sale"
A horse that has nothing wrong with him apart from being unsuitable for the novice you sold him for is not as described at time of sale.

 

[The wife]

I can assure you as you put it as stories from 'friends' that my comments were not made up. The gentleman in question does not have access to the internet and would certainly not get into a debate about your dodgy dealings on a public forum. A agree with a lot of these other comments, you are coming across fantasticly and if I hadn't have personally seen what I had saw you would have me believe it All. For this I have to applaud you. I do just wonder who is actually director of your company? I believe that you are banned from running a business? If this is so, why is Kelly herself not answering any of these questions? I'd like to hear her side as I've said before, I have met her several times at competitions and do wonder what she thinks to all of this?

 

[digitalangel]

Hurrah my favourite silver-tongued devil returns!

I am eagerly awaiting the answers to my questions!

 

[cattysmith]

Watchdog is more of a comedy programme nowadays. That irritating little twerp and his motorbike really does nothing but make me cringe. I just can't believe that the TV licence I pay actually goes towards such shoddy, and ridiculous "reporting"

Oh and what happened to his little friend who he used to go around on the bike with? Aaah that's right....He got THROWN IN PRISON FOR BENEFIT FRAUD!

Anyway, back to the point...this is Horse And a hound not Points Of View.

 

[KellysCobs]

Hurrah my favourite silver-tongued devil returns!

I am eagerly awaiting the answers to my questions!

lol, yes ill be back for more punishment later promise x

 

[KellysCobs]

Watchdog is more of a comedy programme nowadays. That irritating little twerp and his motorbike really does nothing but make me cringe. I just can't believe that the TV licence I pay actually goes towards such shoddy, and ridiculous "reporting"

Oh and what happened to his little friend who he used to go around on the bike with? Aaah that's right....He got THROWN IN PRISON FOR BENEFIT FRAUD!

Anyway, back to the point...this is Horse And a hound not Points Of View.

I like this one. Regards