I'd like some input on some questions I have about a lease I'm getting into to - I'm not sure if I should be happy or not.
I've started a full lease on a nice H/J who is owned by the trainer/stable owner. We agreed on a price. It included "full training" - but the owner says the horse needs to be trained by stable staff 2x weekly, thus I can only ride him 4x weekly (which is only 1 day more than a half lease). I said I would allow this for the first month - but we are now into the second month and the stable owner is still insisting this continue. She says it's to my benefit that the horse be trained - but I somehow can't get over being irritated that I'm paying money for the owner of the horse to train/ride her own horse 2 days a week.
Problem is - the owner wanted about $200-$300 more monthly than I'm paying and she feels she's giving me a really good bargain. My problem is, I was paying about $400 less monthly to do a half lease - so I feel paying $400 for one day more of riding is not such a bargain -- and I'm confused if I'm ungrateful or not.
So -- is it standard to Full Lease a horse and then pay someone else to train it???? I'm confused. Shouldn't a horse be fully trained if someone is going to charge you over $1,200 a month to ride it?
Or am I being ungrateful and demanding?