Bottom line, when I sell a horse I sell it. No retained breedings, no first refusals nothing. If the buyer then wants to contact me later and offer me the chance to buy back a well loved horse, that's awesome and I appreciate their consideration. But I absolutely won't require it.
Yup, sold is sold, if you want to retain then lease, don't sell.
This reminds me of an encounter I had with a person who wanted ROFR on a horse she was selling.
I responded to an ad for a Paint. I forget how old, but in the single digits. She was advertised as a lesson or family horse and prospective broodmare.
The seller told me I would have to sign an "adoption contract", pay an "adoption fee" (something like $2500) and was trying give the impression she was a rescue. I answered asking "if you're a rescue, why are you promoting breeding?"
The seller replied that she is part of an "internationally known" horse rescue who "doesn't run its business like other rescues".
I pressed the point about a rescue promoting breeding, and the seller finally exploded, threatening me with the police and telling me never to bother her or her family again or face the consequences!
That was a horse with strings attached to the point that I wonder if she ever got some sucker to fall for it. Worse thing is that the email she was using was the barn email of a respected show barn in the area. Go figure. Posted via Mobile Device
I removed several disparaging posts from this thread commenting on the fact that the OP has not added another reply to it and seemingly challenging her to do so.
While it's certainly nice when an OP addresses the replies they receive, such replies are never guaranteed, and we ask that you not belabor the fact that an OP has not replied to a thread and instead let any replies you or others have made in the thread stand on their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsms
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipsfirstspike
...Then due to unforseen circumstances (financial, health, etc) I have to sell him back to you for the same price I bought him? When he has perhaps doubled in value? I don't like the sounds of that...
Then you would not be required to agree to the purchase. No one FORCES another to buy a horse from them with any form of buy-back clause. The buyer voluntarily enters into the contract, knowing the provisions and agreeing to them. Therefor, the buyer should keep their written word.
As a seller, I would have kept my end of the bargain. I see nothing wrong with expecting the buyer to do likewise.
As for the subject of the enforceability/validity of a right of first refusal clause in a contract, contracts solidify (and ideally reduce to writing) an agreement between parties, I.e., they represent the terms by which the parties have expressly agreed to enter into their deal. I'm with bsms in that I don't see why a reasonable right of first refusal should be unenforceable if it was factored into a negotiation and agreed upon by both parties as part of a deal, especially where other terms of the deal may have been negotiated differently or the contract not executed at all in its absence.
Regardless,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamcatcher Arabians
Bottom line, when I sell a horse I sell it. No retained breedings, no first refusals nothing. If the buyer then wants to contact me later and offer me the chance to buy back a well loved horse, that's awesome and I appreciate their consideration. But I absolutely won't require it.
This sounds like a good way to avoid complication down the line to me.
50Likes
