Woman suing an animal charity.

[Velcrobum]

As per title

Worker sues animal charity after ‘calm’ horse threw her off

Sarah Ann Potterton was riding a Suffolk Punch draught horse owned by The Otter Trust when a wild swan ‘spooked’ it

www.telegraph.co.uk

for details not behind paywall

Woman who fell off horse and suffered 'brain injury' sues charity

Sarah Ann Potterton, 40, was riding the rare breed of draught horse, owned by The Otter Trust, in April 2019 when a wild swan flew up from a nearby river and caused the nag to shy and gallop away.

www.dailymail.co.uk

The comments in the DM are not sympathetic...........

 

[Rowreach]

That's what insurance is for.

 

[ycbm]

That's what insurance is for.

I agree, but it doesn't sound as though this was anything but an accident and insurance costs, or total lack of availability of insurance cover, could eventually make it impossible to ride a horse you don't own if everyone who has an accident succeeds in a claim.
.

 

[Parrotperson]

Suffolk Punches can gallop?

Agree with ycbm.

 

[AShetlandBitMeOnce]

If you are going to sit on a 700kg prey animal then you need to accept that sometimes there are consequences.
Victim mentality, nothing can possibly be your own fault.

 

[Rowreach]

Look I totally agree that there's a risk involved which people *should* be aware of before getting on, but if riding a horse becomes dependent on owning one or being of a certain standard before you can get on one you don't own, then that will be the end of riding for most people. A spurious claim should be kicked out by the courts, but a valid one should result in compensation for the person who, in some cases, will have life changing injuries.

Accidents happen, sometimes there's blame and sometimes there isn't, but I don't think headlines like "woman suing animal charity" does anything but try to make people think "ooh, what a nasty woman, what about the poor furbabies?" when for all we know she may really need some financial support going forward.

I just prefer to keep an open mind and not rely on emotive headings.

 

[AShetlandBitMeOnce]

Look I totally agree that there's a risk involved which people *should* be aware of before getting on, but if riding a horse becomes dependent on owning one or being of a certain standard before you can get on one you don't own, then that will be the end of riding for most people. A spurious claim should be kicked out by the courts, but a valid one should result in compensation for the person who, in some cases, will have life changing injuries.

Accidents happen, sometimes there's blame and sometimes there isn't, but I don't think headlines like "woman suing animal charity" does anything but try to make people think "ooh, what a nasty woman, what about the poor furbabies?" when for all we know she may really need some financial support going forward.

I just prefer to keep an open mind and not rely on emotive headings.

I agree with this in the case of say a horse having undisclosed KS and letting someone ride, or one where you say you have owned it a year but you've only had it 4 days and aren't sure what it's like to ride, or a pro who you haven't told that the horse has a rearing problem - but I don't think there should be any liability when you are taking a known horse on a hack and it's spooked at a swan taking off, which is a perfectly acceptable reaction from what is a prey animal.

 

[Rowreach]

I agree with this in the case of say a horse having undisclosed KS and letting someone ride, or one where you say you have owned it a year but you've only had it 4 days and aren't sure what it's like to ride, or a pro who you haven't told that the horse has a rearing problem - but I don't think there should be any liability when you are taking a known horse on a hack and it's spooked at a swan taking off, which is a perfectly acceptable reaction from what is a prey animal.

And that is why it's for the insurance company and ultimately the courts to decide in every case.

 

[Merry neddy man]

I have not noticed any mention of if she was wearing a protective hat or not.

 

[criso]

I think the problem for me is the adversarial nature of the process and tbe attempt to attach blame.

They are trying to say the horse was improperly trained and had "an abnormally propensity to spook". Actually a lot of horses might have an issue with a swan, both horses spooked. My very brave, non spooky tb couldn't cope and had to be led past one by a friendly fisherman.


But the problem is the system. If she needs compensation to make up for some loss, then it shouldn't depend on the charity acting incorrectly but should allocated according to need. If the charity is shown to have been negligent she gets her money, if they behaved correctly, she doesn't. She's in the same situation physically in both cases.

She's asking for over 200k (can't be much over or they would have said) so actually quite a small amount and not going to last long for life changing injuries.

 

[ycbm]

Another problem for me is the increasing failure in society for people to take responsibility for their own decisions. If the reports are correct, she had agreed to ride the horse at a County Show. She knew him well and exactly what his background was. She had been handling him and hacking him out and had cantered and galloped on him. She chose to ride him and she should have known, with that level of experience, that horses can do some odd things in response to danger.

She made a choice to accept free riding on a lovely horse, and the choice very sadly backfired badly, in the way riding often does.

It's tempting to think that nobody is hurt by claiming on insurance, so what have you got to lose if you can get a no win no fee lawyer. I'm very sorry that she's injured and needs help, but if everyone who is ever hurt falling off a horse they don't own sues the owner, riding will become impossible to insure, riding schools won't exist to learn at, and nobody sane will ever loan a horse or offer a ride to a friend.
.

 

[Goldenstar]

She had ridden the before before I don’t think she going to win .
It’s unclear in the article but it may well be that the insurer for the charity has refused to pay out and in reality it won’t be the charity that pays any judgement .
Horses spook , they trip , people get hurt .
I can’t see any negligence here from the details given .
The bit that’s not clear is was she employed by the charity in the coffee shop that would muddy things a bit .

 

[dorsetladette]

Did she not have her own rider insurance?

 

[ycbm]

Did she not have her own rider insurance?

It's a commmon misconception that this exists. There isn't really any such thing as comprehensive insurance for riding accidents. The add-ons on horse insurance policies have miniscule payouts and only pay out for stuff like losing a leg or your sight. They are extremely restricted. Proper personal accident insurance costs a fortune.


Harry Hall's personal accident insurance pays out just £10k for one of these. This is typical. This rider's injuries wouldn't even get her the £10k, or any payment at all.

Death
Permanent Total Loss of Sight of One Eye
Permanent Total Loss of Sight of Both Eyes
Loss of one or more limbs
Permanent Total Loss of Speech
Permanent Total Loss of Hearing in one ear - or in both
Permanent Total Disablement

 

[dorsetladette]

It's a commmon misconception that this exists. There isn't really any such thing as comprehensive insurance for riding accidents. The add-ons on horse insurance policies have miniscule payouts and only pay out for stuff like losing a leg or your sight. They are extremely restricted. Proper personal insurance costs a fortune.
.

So when share's are advertised including the line ' must have own rider insurance' it's not really worth it?

 

[Prancerpoos]

S*@# happens. Not a concept that seems to be accepted these days. Where an injury is a result of a deliberate act or negligence, yes, there should be a right to recompense, but often accidents just happen and often there is no one to sue. Just a further example of life and luck.

 

[Ceifer]

I know it’s the Daily Fail but wish they wouldn’t refer to the horse as a ‘nag’

 

[nutjob]

So when share's are advertised including the line ' must have own rider insurance' it's not really worth it?

It's to cover the horse owner if the sharer does something stupid or there is a random accident and the horse causes expensive damage to someone else's property. You don't want to have a bill of £1000's if the rider falls and the horse hits a car, tramples a kid etc.

 

[criso]

The personal accident that comes with my insurance is £20,000 and I'd probably have to lose a limb to get that.

 

[ycbm]

So when share's are advertised including the line ' must have own rider insurance' it's not really worth it?

Exactly. The insurance the loaner needs the rider to have is third party insurance. Its completely up to the rider if they want personal accident cover, it doesn't help the loaner at all.

 

[Tiddlypom]

I don’t think she’s got a case unless she can prove that she was somehow coerced into riding the horse by the charity. The horse behaved like a horse - it happens.

However, the charity seemed to have been encouraging a less experienced rider to take on a young horse with a view to doing a ridden pairs display at a county show in the near future. Anyone who has taken young horses to big shows knows that things can get very exciting indeed. That sounds like poor risk assessment to me, though whether it has any bearing on the result of this case is beyond my pay grade.

 

[dorsetladette]

Exactly. The insurance the loaner needs the rider to have is third party insurance. Its completely up to the rider if they want personal accident cover, it doesn't help the loaner at all.

OK. that was my naivety. I thought it was to avoid this sort of issue.

 

[ycbm]

OK. that was my naivety. I thought it was to avoid this sort of issue.

It's a very common misconception, don't worry. If this was a loan horse from a private individual, she would be claiming on the owner's third party insurance.
.

 

[Maxidoodle]

This is one of the reasons I now refuse to let anyone else ride my horses, I had a terrible accident on a friends new horse, left me with a lot of issues, she didn’t have insurance, I didn’t go after her, I just accepted that it was my decision to get on her horse that day, I took responsibility for my own actions and sadly this seems to be lacking in this day and age.

She was obviously comfortable riding a large prey animal and was capable by their own admission, of riding the horse at all gaits, it reacted just like a prey animal could/would.

 

[Pippity]

It looks like the woman was self-employed, so will have lost a lot of income from being out of work. When I was freelancing, I had income protection insurance because of that risk. (Stupidly, I cancelled it when I started a permanent job, but before my full sick pay entitlement kicked in. The past four months have been very expensive and, frankly, if I could sue myself, I would!)

However, there are always the vagaries of insurance. This was in the USA, admittedly, but a woman fell over her 4yo nephew's toy and broke her arm. Her health insurance required her to sue her nephew, so they could claim the costs off her sibling's home insurance. So there's always the possibility that it isn't her decision to sue.

 

[Fransurrey]

I think the problem for me is the adversarial nature of the process and tbe attempt to attach blame.

They are trying to say the horse was improperly trained and had "an abnormally propensity to spook". Actually a lot of horses might have an issue with a swan, both horses spooked. My very brave, non spooky tb couldn't cope and had to be led past one by a friendly fisherman.

Swans aren't that common place, either, so most horses won't be de-sensitised. We had one weirdo swan who used to go wandering for miles away from his lake. I met him on my horse on a bridleway far from any body of water. My boy did very well, considering. The swan wasn't for stopping or turning round, so we couldn't just go back the way we came as he was marching at quite a pace. I had to dismount and basically defend my steed with my crop, keeping the beaky git at bay as we fenced our way past. I doubt I'd have stayed aboard if I hadn't dismounted - he really flew at us and my poor boy properly shat his furry pants.

 

[splashgirl45]

I fell off a horse I was sharing , who spooked and had a serious brain injury which has resulted in me having to give up horses completely . There is no way I would have sued the owner as it was my decision to ride and as I am a competent rider the owner was not at fault by allowing me to ride her horse.. this person had been riding the horse regularly and it sounds like an unfortunate accident which was no one’s fault

 

[humblepie]

It is all to do with the wording of the Animals Act and characteristics of an animal at certain times. Much complicated.

 

[OrangeAndLemon]

But the horse tripped after spooking. The spook itself didn't cause her to fall. The trip could have happened at any speed.

it's all very complicated and it makes me feel very uneasy, particularly as these horses are bred for temperament. A suffolk stallion showing a spooky nature would be gelded. I know because a friend had her graded Suffolk stallion gelded when he was just too reactive.

 

[HopOnTrot]

Unusual event: swan
Unusual event: trip
Clearly a total accident.