Hi. I'm trying to ascertain what the standard is in the industry for this.
I'm leasing a horse who is in a training program at the stable. The horse is trained 3 days a week by the training staff. I did not ride the horse for 2 months, as was out of the country, and when I returned - the horse was lame. After non-complete explanations about what had happened, I found out from the owner it had been incurred an injury during training by the staff (the owner does not ride him) - though I am still unsure of the full story. I am continuing to pay the lease, but he is still lame.
I totally understand that these things happen. But my question is -- if I had been riding this horse during that time period, I would be held accountable for the vet bills, etc. I'm wondering why the stable is not held accountable for the bills now? Furthermore - as the horse is layed up, it strikes me odd that they are continuing to bill the owner for "training fees", as the horse cannot be ridden -- and I am continuing to pay to lease him -- to "reserve" him for when he's better -- whenever that might be.
I'm not sure how to feel about it. Is it my responsibility to lease this horse through his injury -- as if I owned the horse, I certainly couldn't walk away (but that's why we lease, right - and it is a month to month agreement). Or should I be angry that the stable has cost me so much money already when they caused this in the first place?