Would you pay to share a horse?

[ QUOTE ]
Horses for courses hey. LOL.

My guys pay but just not with money. They do kind things without being asked. For me it just makes my horsey experience so much more pleasant I would go insane without them.

[/ QUOTE ]

That sounds really appreciative of your sharers.
 
but this is what i mean you learn so much in a lesson i personally get more satisfaction from caring for a horse as apposed to going round a school on a riding school horse.

As for charging for the privalege of mucking out well having horses is a privalege IMO does not mean that everyone see's it that way but horses are a privalege to own ride,groom,cuddle whatever way you want to look at it you get alot more paying some money towards loaning one than you do riding at a riding school ok so your not learning riding instruction wise but so you get to a certain level where a riding school cant teach you anymore or you feel you have leanrt all you want to if you feel you have reached a lever you are happy at and get a loan horse.
 
I've done both. We loaned a pony for my daughter. We paid for all her livery and expenses. We had sole use of her and used her as if she was our own. I have a TB now and a friend's daughter rides him twice a week. She says sht days she wants to ride. I don't charge her as she's doing me a favour by helping to exercise him. In the winter when he's in out night, she mucks out on the days she rides. In the summer she has no chores to do. I prefer it this way cos it helps me out, but i also have full control. So i think it's each to their own, as long as it's clear whats involved etc. and no-one feels used.
 
Personally I do think that sharers should contribute to the costs when sharing a horse.

Horses are expensive and although it can be a two way thing, why should someone benefit from having and enjoying a horse without contributing towards it? After all at the end of the day the owner has the ultimate responsibility, insurance livery, feed, bedding, shoeing etc.

I have shared both my horses and although I didnt ask for much, I think it shows a committment on their behalf if they are prepared to give something, particularly as lessons are so expensive.

The only time I wouldn't expect payment would be if the sharer could competently school and improve my horse, however in my experience most sharers are very often quite novice.

If both sides are benefiting, then I don't see what the problem is.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you see the thing really confusing me is why people seem to think they can use peoples horses free of charge

[/ QUOTE ]I think you're viewing this in a very narrow and unfair way. 'Use' could readily be replaced with 'care for', 'groom', 'muck out', 'exercise' and 'turn in/out'. I would consider those as favours to me the owner, not privileges that I bestow upon the loaner! Charge them for the pleasure of mucking out my stable? Hmmm. I do agree that shoeing and so forth should be divided between loaner and owner to the ratio that the horse's time is divided, but extra charges on top seem unreasonable.

[ QUOTE ]
you can pay an stupid ammount of money for a lesson on a school horse theese days but yet find it shocking that owners want £25- £35 a week for half a week with a horse.

[/ QUOTE ] But lessons are instruction from qualified individuals helping you to improve your riding and done on horses that are fed, groomed, mucked out and tacked up for you by stable-hands. This is a totally different situation from loaning. It is readily possible to get jobs on yards where you do lots of chores and some riding (just like loaning), and astonishingly, they pay you.

[ QUOTE ]
And anyone who doesnt want to do yard chores obviously cant be that desperate for one of there own-

[/ QUOTE ] Again, life isn't this black and white. Sometimes people don't have time; loaners can have jobs and other commitments too and I think it's unfair to simply write off someone's dissatisfaction with loaning as 'not wanting it enough'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you chillidragon, you have taken the words out of my mouth
smile.gif
 
You have to understand that it works both ways.

It is NOT all about money, which is what you are reducing it to.

When I had Paris, before I sold her, I had a friend moreorless sharing her. It wasn't official, but she rode her a few times a week and looked after her on those days. I didn't ask for any money because it did me a favour, keeping her exercised and allowing me to have those days off to do my own thing.

To define everything in terms of money is just narrowminded. You can help and contribute without necessarily paying.
 
yes but how instructive are lessons at a riding school? i have taught at 2 riding schools and the horses only have a certain limit so in theory you can only learn so much at a riding school and this is why people go off buy horses and dont know how to care for them correctly they think its as easy as turning up and heres a ready prepared horse they dont know the work that goes into it.Again riding schools can only take you so far then if you feel your limit is bigger you go off and buy one and pay for lessons to bring you further unless you all know of some wonderful school horses that are more advanced than the ones in york?
 
Bonzabean - this is absolutely my take on it, word for word!

A couple of years ago now I went to try a horse for 'share' and decided to take it on - on a riding/chores twice a week basis for £20 a week.

After a few weeks I returned to the owner and said that I wasn't happy with the paid arrangement - that I felt that it usurps the owners capacity to be 'the owner' (I didn't say that I also felt slightly resentful at paying for something that was essentially a favour.. but you get my jist...) so we changed the arrangement that there were no longer set days, she gave me a buzz to let me know which days she was busy and needed help, but also to specify what work she wanted done with the horse - whether she felt he needed lungeing or a hack out or flat schooling.

In this way she still maintains the sense of being in charge of what is happening to her horse, I feel like I have clear instructions of what needed doing - and I was also getting to ride. She was still saving money, as she didn't need to pay yard staff to bring in or muck out, and she was saving time too.

To have to pay to provide a service makes no sense to me - perhaps it's slightly different in that I have been a horse owner for most my life, and am generally skilled enough to actually improve the horse's schooling and work alongside an owner.

'Sharing' (I can't help but put it in quotations, as it's such a misnomer...) seems especially prevalent here in the south east, and I do find it odd, even now. I am a firm believer in that if you cannot afford a horse - in terms of the balance of time/money, then you shouldn't own one. As harsh as that sounds!!!
 
[ QUOTE ]
You have to understand that it works both ways.

It is NOT all about money, which is what you are reducing it to.

When I had Paris, before I sold her, I had a friend moreorless sharing her. It wasn't official, but she rode her a few times a week and looked after her on those days. I didn't ask for any money because it did me a favour, keeping her exercised and allowing me to have those days off to do my own thing.

To define everything in terms of money is just narrowminded. You can help and contribute without necessarily paying.

[/ QUOTE ]


yes but friends are different i would let my mates ride mine for free but someone i have never come across in my life will pay for the loan.
 
Thats right xspiralx. I put so much time and effort into the horse, most times it has been a lot more than the owner that I feel they should be paying me
grin.gif
 
in terms of the balance of time/money, then you shouldn't own one. As harsh as that sounds!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

peoples circumstances change get divorced or whatever other reason means they can no longer afford to pay for a horse on there own or even have the time to care for it due to children ect should they then not have a horse they have had from a foal or had for many years and is a well loved pet because there financial or time circumstances have changed if the loaner is paying or not?
 
You're missing the point of my post.

Right now I am riding two horses for two different people. Both lovely, both kind enough to allow me to ride for free. I didn't know them before they contacted me about this arrangement, however it allows me to ride, which I want, and gets their horses a bit more exercise - which they want. Its a good thing all round.

I have been in both situations - as the owner, and as the rider. If both parties are happy with the arrangement, what right has anyone else to say that its not fair.

Like I said, to define it in purely financial terms is narrowminded and not really seeing the whole picture.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Thats right xspiralx. I put so much time and effort into the horse, most times it has been a lot more than the owner that I feel they should be paying me
grin.gif


[/ QUOTE ]


well on one hand if you are putting so much time and effort into it then surely you are getting more than your moneys worth anyway if you are getting more than 3 and a half days a week that more than a part loan.I would seriously either get your own,go to a riding school or find another person who just wants yard duites and you get riding in return.
I think this is going to be one of those two gangs one on either side of the wall one thinking its cheeky to expect money and the other half thinking it ok to contribute towards a horse.
 
but because that it great for you and it works and thinking that is be all and end all is narrow minded just because your situation works does not mean it makes it right nor does mine either,i personally would feel like i was using soemone by not contributing i wouldnt borrow a car use the petrol in the tank and not fill it up.
 
I haven't read all the responses but I would say it can be better than this.

We share our pony and ask for £35 - £40 a week. In return, the sharer gets 100% access, they can come down any day they want and do as little or as much as they want. The get company on ride outs and access to a 10 mile private bridal path. They can go away for a week and we will do all the looking after or they can come everyday and ride every day. They just have to let us know. Additionally, I pay for the insurance, the shoeing, all the feed and if our pony loses a shoe and I can't get the farrier then the sharer can ride one of the girls' horses if they come down. On top of that I will tow them to lessons and shows if we can fit it in. We have had a sharer since September and we are now looking for a new one as she is moving to London. But I think she has really enjoyed it!! So sometimes it's worth paying!
 
You can't compare horses to a car!

I never said my situation was the be all and end all, and I have said from the start that in some situations, it is perfectly fair to contribute towards the keep of the horse.

However what I am saying is that it is narrowminded to say that riding someone's horse without paying is "using" them, because its simply not always the case. Often the owner gets something good out of it too, therefore you are "using" each other and it is mutually beneficial.
 
and also one more thing i would like to say is i actually agree if your a more competent rider than the owner and are doing them a favour by bringing the horse on beyond anything they could and get it to a high level of competing i DONT think you should have to pay as much as you really are doing them a favour that is the only time i would not expect them to pay half of costs but they would pay half shoes,petrol for lorry comp fees.
 
I think it depends on each individual set up.

I have sat here and thought what would I do if C handed me a wodge of cash to put towards the keeping of S (The horse). I would actually feel very uncomfortable about it and would refuse the money.

I then sat here and thought about different people I know. Some people I would have to pay with money as that is how they work. Others would be happy for jobs to be done in return and a couple of them would be chuffed to bits with a bottle of wine and a box of choccies. It really is down to the individuals involved and the whole set up.

Interesting discussion hearing everyone's views. I still think my opinion is best though. LOL
tongue.gif
 
yeah ok using was probably the wrong word but i think everyone who rides peoples horses should at least contribute towards shoes at the very least.

and as for the cars thing not comparing just a metaphore
 
PMSL well its each to there own i think different circumstances are just that but i personally would feel wrong not contributing towards the cost of a horse i was riding i would like to feel like i was helping out.
 
My sharer contributes she is in part sharing her keep and treats her as if she's her own - i trust her not to do anything stupid so leave her to do what she wants on her days - however i have known her for years and would trust her to make the right decision. She also gets to ride on my days too sometimes as i can't always make it. We are very flexible to whos doing when and go down and help each other out on our off days too.

She says she has gained a lot from it in respect to horse care and it means we both get to spend time in the week with our husbands so it works out perfectly for us.
 
I think it is cheeky if people ask alot of money to part share or loan cause at the end of the day it is the owner who is looking for someone to help them out with their horse...I agree that certain costs should be meet but not a huge amount as that is just unfair....
 
I pay £50 a week as a sharer and for me the arrangement is brilliant. I know it is a lot of money but it means that I get to ride as often as I want. It is meant to be four days but I could ride every day if I wished.

The reason it works so well for me is that I am an inexperienced rider, only riding for one year. I was paying almost the same price for one riding lesson a week at a BHS school. This arrangement means that I get to ride and practice a lot more than I was just riding for one hour a week. I still have regular lessons to improve. The horse is on full livery which means I don't have to do any chores.

I guess for me it comes down to the fact that I am happy to pay because the arrangement benefits me enormously. If it helps the owner then that is a bonus but irrelevant. If I was an experienced rider who could actually school and improve the horse I might feel differently, but I can't!!!
grin.gif
 
I "share" my horse, and contribute towards her keep. Her owner didnt ask for the money, but like another poster mentioned earlier, I personally feel that I should pay something for what I am getting. I actually think I have one of the best share arrangements around, I am hugely grateful for what I have, so I see the money as a small price to pay.

I don't have set days. Although Cazza owns Brooklyn, she doesn't ride her much, so I have essentially unlimited use of a horse, an indoor school, a massive estate to hack out on, and probably a load of other things as well. I can do as much or as little as i want with her, and its just fantastic. My job sends me round the world from time to time, so it would be very expensive for me to have a horse of my own on full livery somewhere - but I know that if I can't come down for a few days, Brooklyn is taken care of.

I see helping out around the yard and working with the other horses as part and parcel of the whole thing. I get a horse to play with, and in return I pay a small contribution weekly, and do other jobs to help out (I have learned much more than i ever wanted to about how long it takes to rake the track out of a sandschool by hand !).

It seems only fair that, if the agreement is to pay a set amount per week for the share, that that should continue even if the horse can't be ridden. Brook has been off work for a bit recently due to a back problem, but i wouldn't dream of not paying my share or continuing to help out. If she was mine she'd still have to be paid for and looked after, so why shouldn't I continue to do so now?
 
I have both paid and not paid, and have had good and bad experiences, so if one isn't for you then do look around for others. What do you want from a share? I find they work out if the owner just wants some help towards bills, jobs, exercising etc, and somebody who will do the best by their horse. If you can afford your own and don't like somebody else having the ultimate say, then owning your own might be better for you.

For me, money is tight but lessons wasn't enough - I missed the jobs, the partnership, the thrills and spills and time with a horse. I couldn't and still can't afford my own, so am very grateful to have a good chunk of that experience in part loaning instead. I don't think £25 a week is unreasonable when you think of the cost of horses - not just livery and shoes but feed/wormers/insurance/hay & straw/VETS bills etc.

I am extremely lucky - I have almost sole use of a fantastic welsh cob, the owner is now one of my best friends and we now house share with the horses kept close by. She has always insisted on no payment, and is grateful that I have brought her horse on, got him out and about, exposed to new things etc, and keep him fit, I am grateful that I get a fantastic horse to hang out with and ride and now a fantastic set-up where he is kept close to home. I am "living the dream" with a great horse and owner, and we show our appreciation of what the other is giving in what small ways we can. I find money tighter now so am grateful she doesn't want or need a weekly contribution from me, but £25 a week would be a complete bargain for what I get. Instead, I have lessons on him and "invest" in her horse that way, and/or buy the odd bag of haylage/feed/new boots etc.

I have landed on my feet, so hope if you don't feel you have in your current situation, look elsewhere, there really are some great owners out there...
cool.gif
but look beyond the money to what you and they want out of it.
 
I have shared 3 different horses and had 3 different share arrangements. The first horse was an old but still lively hunter whose owner wanted it hacking out to keep its joints mobile. No money exchanged hands.

The second share was a disaster. It was a Welsh Sec D whose owner needed some help with the costs of horse ownership but didn't actually want anyone sharing her horse, she was just doing out of necessity. She was extremely nitpicking and insisted that I brush the numnah after every ride and she even told me how many dandy brush strokes per side I should use! There were many other instances of control freakery. I can't remember how much I paid her but I soon ended the arrangement because she was just too weird for my liking.

My third share, which lasted for 5 years until I moved out of the area, was brilliant. I paid £25 per week and half of shoeing, dentist and worming costs and I got to ride 3 times a week. The owner and I really got on well and we were very similar in riding ability (and also had lessons with the same instructor) and our ideas of horse cared also matched. I still keep in touch with her.
 
Sounds pretty similar to me and my situation. I have a girl who has one of mine on loan, she pays £25 to keep him at mine, he is happy here, I can keep an eye on him, I do the morning chores and she comes in the evenings mucks out, rides and faffs about with him, she can use my school, hacks out with me, if I am going schooling she can come along, if he is unrideable she can take out my mare. I also took her to a show last week with my mare as she is quite a nervous girl and my mare is really safe.
My sharer / loanee has a pretty good deal for £25 a week, and I can see both sides, I think people have to be realistic about what works for them and try being a little altruistic!
 
[ QUOTE ]
I've got a couple of outgrown ponies and I have two girls who ride them. It's not quite the same as sharing as they have more or less sole use, and they pay £100 a month plus shoes. I think they get quite a good deal as although they do some chores to help me out on weekends and one day midweek, I have to do everything else the rest of the week when they don't come up.

They go on sponsored rides, can go to some shows and have lessons. I would like them to help more but they don't live nearby so they can't come up without a parent to drive them. But overall I am happy and I think they are. Does that sound reasonable to anyone else?

Maybe that would be a better option - find someone who has a horse they don't ride and offer to look after it and ride it, rather than try to share a horse with a rider who wants someone to play second fiddle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds very reasonable to me
smile.gif

We have a little welshie whom my daughter is really too big for, and we will have to find a sharer soon. Problem is the pony is rather quirky so I can't have a total novice on her, and most kids with the kind of experience needed to ride her will either be too big or already have their own pony
smirk.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
It seems only fair that, if the agreement is to pay a set amount per week for the share, that that should continue even if the horse can't be ridden. Brook has been off work for a bit recently due to a back problem, but i wouldn't dream of not paying my share or continuing to help out. If she was mine she'd still have to be paid for and looked after, so why shouldn't I continue to do so now?

[/ QUOTE ]

not relevant to me at the moment but 2 horses I part loaned in the past both ended up off work for a good few weeks. One of the clauses the owner put in the written agreement I had with the owner was that if off work for X weeks I would stop having to pay and had the option of cancelling the agreement if I wanted. It did actually happen, (it was always a possibility as when I started the share, one horse was only just coming back into work, having never really found the cause of lameness, and in the end he had to be retired) - I made use of that clause and ended the share early, and it all ended pleasantly, as the owner didn't think it fair I should pay if I didn't have use of them, neither did I, and years later we are still in touch. if god forbid I had to look elsewhere again I would look to have that clause in, but its a personal decision to what you feel is fair yourself.
smile.gif
 
Oh, I forgot to mention in my already very long post, that I think it is more important that the PEOPLE in a share arrangement get on well together. When I was looking for a share horse last year, I saw a lot of adverts that stipulated "experienced rider / no novices / experienced carer" etc. You can LEARN to be a competent rider, you can learn to care for a horse, but if the owner and sharer don't click, then the share arrangement is doomed.

It doesn't matter how well someone rides your horse and gets the best out of it - if you can't stand the sight of them, you'll constantly resent them hanging around your yard and riding your horse. If however someone is a bit of a numpty rider and doesn't know much about horse care, but is willing to learn on both counts, and is a nice person that you get on with, then the share is much more likely to go well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top