The Horse Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Going To Court - Small vent, advice welcome.

2K views 14 replies 11 participants last post by  boots 
#1 ·
I'm going to try and keep this as brief as possible as it is not my story directly, but I have a lot of curiosities.

A client of mine who was new to horses used a trainer/broker to buy horses as they trusted her at the time. Well they also paid in advance (Not a good idea, I know) for training services on one of the horses. As it turns out that horse will never be sound to ride due to the conformation of his back legs (Halter bred). That, they have admitted to fault for as buying the horse without a vet check - But after the trainer cut off all contact with them and said never to call again, they decided to sue over the lost training money they never received.

Well today, during mediation, she basically refused to budge and refused to talk about anything, but she DID assert that these people were neglecting their horses (A thousand percent NOT true, the horses are in excellent shape, with the exception of one who is MILDLY thin - but she has been rapidly gaining and she is a TB, so hard to keep weight on. The other two are in excellent shape, and the one they sold a month ago was also in great shape, maybe even a little chubby)

This lady is asserting that their horses are "emaciated".

I am not even sure what that has to do with the training money at all, but I wonder, if that something that should just be totally ignored? I took pictures of their horses today from all angles just in case it became a thing, but do you think that's even necessary? She obviously has no grounds to state this, and she hasn't even SEEN the horses in months.

And even though this has nothing to do with me personally, I did find out she is talking some nasty things about me behind my back because I am working with them. I have never even met this woman, I didn't even know what she looked like before today and I had never heard of her even. Yet she became all lovey dovey with my BO and told her that my clients were cheating, sue happy liars - To which resulted in them almost being refused at the barn I use to train (I had to sit down my BO to tell her the truth), and apparently has been talking at shows while I've been away that I use abusive methods like tying tires to back legs and leaving horses without water for days on end before I start them, or pulling horses over backwards in their stalls, all stuff I have NEVER done and would never do. Everyone who knows me knows this.

So, whether I like it or not, I seem to be a part of this with a woman I have never met.

My clients are kind people. They are unbelievably honest, albeit a little horse ignorant. I am trying to stay out of their legal proceedings but if they need me I am definitely a witness that they take excellent care of their horses.

Is there anything I should be doing now that might be able to help them? Or anything they could be doing further to help themselves? They are keeping remarkably cool heads, meanwhile I am absolutely furious at the events that have taken place.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
The other trainer sounds like she's desperate because she knows that she's in the wrong, but she's trying to divert attention/blame away from her any way she can.

Taking the pics was a good idea, just in case. I doubt anything will come of it and I doubt the judge will pay it any mind, but stranger things have happened.

As for her bad-mouthing you, if you can prove that she has cost you clients because of what she has said, then you could sue her for slander. That would take the wind out of her sails real quick.
 
#3 ·
Make sure the pics you take were date and time stamped, give them to your clients with a note from you stating you just took the pics for them. Nothing more. Let them handle their own beezwax. Unless you want to try to sue the other trainer, keep your head down, stay out of court unless you're called and mind your own.
 
#4 ·
That's what I did and what I'm attempting to do. I am more asking because there's always the reality something like this could happen again, maybe to me next time, and I'd like to learn from the issues of others instead of making my own.
 
#5 ·
That's a good idea and smart to try to figure out what NOT to do from what was done. Basically, I would think if you a) were empowered to buy a horse for someone, once they accepted ownership of the horse, I'd have them sign an "As is, where is" statement that they understand that the horse I bought for them comes with no warranty expressed or implied, no soundness guarantee and that they either chose or declined a vet check and were satisfied with the condition of the horse on XXX day. I wouldn't accept money in advance, that's just plain bad business. And, as you've been hearing, don't go around bad mouthing others. It just leaves a bad taste in peoples mouths even when it's gospel. And it gives you a nasty rep.
 
#7 ·
The condition of the horses is not in question. Though, since the seemingly unethical trainer is spreading that around, the photos weren't a bad idea. I doubt, however, you will even testify, since the suit is about services that were paid for and never provided.

I apologize if I missed it, but was there a written contract? Really, um, stupid if there was not. And one doesn't have to be knowledgeable about horses to know to get one.

Anyway, if there is not a contract, that makes it tougher for the clients to recoup losses. Not impossible, but the amount can be questioned, the services that were supposed to be provided can be argued down.

Good contracts make for polite business deals. And less stress!
 
#8 · (Edited)
Not a lawyer myself, but if she continues, perhaps a cease and desist letter re defamation would be in order.

Your clients might also want to ask their lawyer about a gag order on her regarding their case, so they don't suddenly find themselves getting kicked out of barns ect.

Like Kiger said, it's a small world and her going around to shows and other barns bad mouthing you with falsehoods is not acceptable.
 
#10 · (Edited)
To simplify in my mind Persons A want horses so the use a broker,Person B, to purchase several horses. Persons A fail to get a vet check on said horses trusting Person B to choose sound animals. They pay Person B in advance to train one of said horses. That horse is unsound so they resell that animal and keep the other three they are happy with. Who paid for the horses originally? Was the training fee included in the purchase amount if the buyer made the initial purchase? or Did the new owner pay the original owner directly and then paid the trainer (Person B) a finder's fee. Could the finder's fee be confused with the training fee? My questions are: Did training take place prior to the determination that the horse was not sound and that is how it was discovered? Add to that was the horse under full care by person B at this point thus using up some of the training money for board? or Was the unsoundness determined prior to training so Person A essentially wants a refund of those monies as no training/care/board took place by person B? If the answer to the first was yes then perhaps a partial repayment is in order. If the answer is no to the first and yes to the second then a refund should be forth coming. BUT, if there was no contract spelling out obligations of either party then it may well be person A will never see that money. I would be curious to know how things escalated to the point that Person B cut off all contact and told Persons A never to call again. I certainly don't agree with the way Person B is handling things at things at this point but could there have been some antagonizing going on by person A that lead to this reaction? If I buy a horse through someone here (a trusted friend) I make out three checks, four if the animal is going to her for training. One check is to the current owner for purchase. One check is to the vet that does the PPE. One is to the friend that covers cost of her time and travel to determine if the horse is suitable and an added percentage of the purchase price as a finder's fee. A separate check would be written to cover training and board if the animal is transferred to the friend's care to tune it up or put basics on it. IMO it does sound like a bait and switch on the part of Person B to sway things in her favor. That she has drug you into the mix and is slandering you, you if you have proof of this have grounds to sue as well.
 
#11 ·
This is all one sticky mess and I would stay out of it as much as possible. There really isn't much input you can give to the case unless you were present when a verbal or written contract was made, which apparently you weren't. verbal contracts can be binding and not easy to prove. Often the terms are not clearly stated and can be misinterpreted As for your reputation being slandered, unfortunately you need proof of that (someone willing to sign a statement or testify in court if necessary) or you could try a bluff. I would contact a lawyer. Often a letter from an attorney saying that charges will be made if the problem continues is enough. Some time it's better to avoid a battle unless you are sure that you can win.
 
#14 ·
Yes if the slander does not stop we will be having a talk. I have a good reputation in the horse community around here, and everyone she has told contacted me and said they couldn't believe it because they knew better - So that's good. Regardless I want that to stop.

The horses purchased fee was seperate of the training fee. They paid her for the horse, then paid her for three months of training that was never received.

They found out the horse was not going to be riding sound when they had the vet out to do teeth, vaccinations, selenium shots etc and he immediately noticed the straight back legs and spoke up.

They are not sueing for the money on the horse. They understand that they made a rookie mistake by not vet checking - but they are asking for the training money back, and will be rehoming the horse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top