# Non insured instructor



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

Title pretty much says it all.

New boarders had asked if a 'friend' to give lessons to their girls. Said friend is not a traditional instructor, does not have insurance and yes would charge them for lessons. We said as long as she provided us with a release of liability - fine. 

They started lessons with me last week. Now the friend (not the parents) left me a message to ask if she can talk to me about what I 'really need'. "Can we discuss this?" Message sounds as if she is annoyed.

Thoughts?


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

I don't understand the question, sorry.

What does she mean by 'what you really need'?

If she signed the liability waiver and you're okay with her teaching, then what is there to discuss?


----------



## Zeke (Jun 27, 2010)

You went from this being your "friends" asking a "friend" to give lessons then motives into you giving the lessons? Is there another person wanting to give these girls lessons and she wants to bribe you to give her the clients?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

If I am understanding your post correctly it sounds like you are being very generous offering that she can teach with out having to have her own liability insurance, she just has to sign a release of liability for you.

I too am confused on what there is to discuss.



I always wonder why boarders do not ask these questions before they move to a new barn.


----------



## ErikaLynn (Aug 3, 2010)

I don't know if I'm answering your question, because I don't understand it, but, I think you should not have an instructor with no insurance on your property. If something happens, it's all your fault. That's assuming that you aren't insured, which I hope isn't the case.


----------



## Jake and Dai (Aug 15, 2008)

I may have this completely wrong but let's see...


Boarders wanted friend to give their daughters lessons at your barn.
You said fine, with a liability waiver.
*You* started giving the daughters lessons.
Boarder's friend now wants to discuss situation with you.
Is that right?

If so, she's probably annoyed you are teaching 'her' clients and wants in on the action. I'd tell her there is nothing to discuss.

And if I totally misinterpreted this...oops!


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

We asked that the friend provide US with the liabilty release. We provide a form for the boarders if they have a friend out to ride. That release specifically states that no money changes hands.

I had told the boarder we need it to say that in the event of an issue - the friend understands she is 100% responsible for any financial or legal problems that may arise as the direct result of her lessons. Any damage to the facility or equipment, injury (or worse) to any horse or human.

The 'friend' is a person we have met before. Rode with her a couple of times. My thought is that she thinks we are riding buddies and we will look the other way so she can circumvent the policies established by our insurance agent and attorney.

These folks are first time horse owners that had boarded with her. She asked them to leave as the mare kicked one of her horses and did some stall damage. (old bossy brood mare). They hope to be short term as they have an offer on a property but are waiting to sell theirs. Yes - I know grin and bear it thought did occur to us. Unfortunately, this gal made us all nervous when she competed with us last winter. Had her horses been polite and mannerly, I would be more willing to bend . . .


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

So, the 'friend' has yet to provide the liability release?

If so, no training on your property. Period.

I still don't get what she wants to discuss. She knows what you need, and until she provides it, she stays off the property in a teaching capacity.


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

Jake and Dai said:


> I may have this completely wrong but let's see...
> 
> 
> Boarders wanted friend to give their daughters lessons at your barn.
> ...


 
You are correct!

I heading home to trailer out for a lesson with myself as student! (on no - not her as an instructor!) 

I will look forward to your replies in the morning.


----------



## Jake and Dai (Aug 15, 2008)

It also sounds like the friend had the opportunity to sign the liability waiver, but didn't. So the boarders asked you to give their daughters the lessons.

Personally, I'd tell the friend to take it up with the boarders. It is their decision who teaches their daughters and I don't think you should get in the middle of that decision.

But I definitely agree that if the boarders change their minds and want the friend to teach, do NOT allow it without that waiver signed. It seems to me you were pretty clear on the requirement and the friend was trying to circumvent your policies based on the fact that you rode with her a few times (as you said). And now that you are being paid to give the lessons, she is feeling put out.

The only thing I'd 'discuss' with her (the friend), and it would be a short discussion, is the fact she must sign that waiver. Full stop.


----------



## maura (Nov 21, 2009)

The whole situation makes multiple alarm bells go off in my head. 

Sounds like the pseudo-instructor has some qualms about signing something that says she's not receiving money. Since that's probably incorrect, and may even be fraud. 

Look at it this way - she won't accept the liability of the bossy mare on *her* property, but wants you to accept that liability while she teaches lessons at your place. Last time I ran a horse business, boarding was 95% percent overhead and a tiny profit if you were lucky, and free lance teaching without insurance at someone else's barn is 0% overhead and 100% profit. 

Tell her politely that your attorney and insurance agent have advised against it; and that you can't accomodate her. 

The boarders can either 1.) take lessons with you 2.) haul offsite to their lessons or 3.) move their horses, which, BTW are usually the standard options.


----------



## rcshawk (Aug 3, 2010)

I would agree that it doesn't sound like any good can come out of it. As an insurance agent I would be required to advise against it. If therre is a claim, even with a waiver, you may still be liable. 

Why the special accomadations for a trainer you don't seem to have much respect for and a short term boarder?


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Great points Maura.


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

maura said:


> Tell her politely that your attorney and insurance agent have advised against it; and that you can't accomodate her.


Exactly what I told her when I called her back. (got her voice mail). I said my attorney has advised we do not allow anyone without insurance to teach on the property. 

Started out with "What you need is a form that releases *farm name* from any issues resulting from your teaching and states that you are responsible legally and financially should any damage or injury result. Typically it's a form you would get from your attorney or insurance agent."

Not a word back from her. We (husband) and I suspect she is trying to keep these folks under her thumb. As they are short term (IF/WHEN they can get their house sold), I am not overly worried about this issue going very far. In my opinion, if they wanted her to teach, they would be the ones bugging me for concessions.


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

rcshawk said:


> Why the special accomadations for a trainer you don't seem to have much respect for and a short term boarder?


Nothing special. I am just trying to see if there is a side I am missing. Fresh eyes.

(she is not a trainer by any stretch of the imagination. My husband who always has nice things to say about people - vividly recalls how she kept making excuses for her naughty horse. Oh she was on the track, oh she was on the track).


----------



## Solon (May 11, 2008)

From what I've ever heard around here (Oregon) waivers don't always amount to much anyway and sometimes the barns are still liable.


----------



## Maverick101 (Nov 8, 2009)

My question is why would she herself want to teach lesson w/out being insured? Sure she is teaching a "friend" but I have seen friends turn on each other quite quickly when serious injuries are involved.:shock:

So you have a waiver releasing you, and your own insurance will also help you in this type of situation... someone suing you is harder then them turning around and suing her....so really its in her best interest to get insured herself??

Just saying


----------



## rcshawk (Aug 3, 2010)

Maverick101 said:


> My question is why would she herself want to teach lesson w/out being insured? Sure she is teaching a "friend" but I have seen friends turn on each other quite quickly when serious injuries are involved.:shock:
> 
> So you have a waiver releasing you, and your own insurance will also help you in this type of situation... someone suing you is harder then them turning around and suing her....so really its in her best interest to get insured herself??
> 
> Just saying


This is incorrect I think. Waivers generally aren't held up in court. It is correct that the BO's insurance will defend them and not the trainer. The fact that the trainer hasn't insurance will make the owner more vunerable. Especially if the trainer has little or no assets there really wouldn't be anything to win in a suit with the trainer. The BO would by far be the target of the litigation, I would think. This would also have possible implications on the BO's insurabilty in the future. There just seems to be much to lose in this with very little to gain.


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

It is true there is no such thing as an air tight waiver, contract, etc - ("only worth as much as the paper it is printed on" or "only as good as the attorney you find to take on the case" ) there are not many day to day folks who would take it very far. 

We are not handing this woman anything to sign. Per our attorney - we do not want to set ourselves up for any potential loop hole. She is the one who has to present us with any release forms.


----------



## Maverick101 (Nov 8, 2009)

mls said:


> It is true there is no such thing as an air tight waiver, contract, etc - ("only worth as much as the paper it is printed on" or "only as good as the attorney you find to take on the case" ) there are not many day to day folks who would take it very far.
> 
> We are not handing this woman anything to sign. Per our attorney - we do not want to set ourselves up for any potential loop hole. She is the one who has to present us with any release forms.



True to some degree. If that was the case then I wouldn't make my boarders sign boarding contracts...as you say not worth the paper they're written on:wink:

Of course no contract is "air tight" even when written up by a lawyer...someone somewhere will always find a loop hole so to speak, that being said....

When a person signs a contract or waiver, they are less likely to sue someone whom it was written by, but go after the easier target...in this case the "non-insured instructor".

A barn that is insured and that has issued a wavier/contract to someone else is the harder target to go after. it would be much more costly, and time consuming then going after the instructor.....

Would I ever allow anyone to teach lessons on my property that wasn't insured, even w a contract or waiver, no. And my Lawyer to would advise against it.

my point was merely that IMO the person giving the lessons is crazy for teaching lessons uninsured.


----------



## MissPhoebe (Jul 13, 2010)

Are the people taking lessons riding their own horses that are boarded at your barn or are they riding your horses?

I ask this because last year I had a major accident at the barn where I board and ended up in the hospital, big bills, etc. Since the ER listed it as a riding accident my insurance company, unknown to me until they called, decided to try to get the homeowner's of the place where I board to pay for the accident and make them liable because it happened on their property. When I started boarding there I signed all of the contracts and waivers and she even has multiple state provided signs about rider assuming the risk, but when it came down to it, the insurance company still tried. When I talked to my insurance company, because I was very upset and didn't want the family where I board to be liable, they said that since I was riding a horse that I own, even if it is boarded somewhere else, I am the responsible party and my insurance has to pay all the bills. I had to send proof that it was my horse, but the homeowners were not liable. However, they told me that if it is a horse owned by the barn or someone riding another boarders horse, then the owners would have been liable. Don't know if this helps at all. 

Do the people own a trailer? Maybe they should just haul to the trainer's facility.


----------



## maura (Nov 21, 2009)

Re: waivers and contracts -

I am NOT a lawyer, but my understanding has always been that neither will hold up if the plaintiff can prove negligence on your part. 

So, yes, they have value and yes, you should use them. And yes, having them in place will help you in a situation where there is injury or loss of property, BUT they will not protect you if the accident, injury or loss of property can be attributed to negligence. 

Also, there's a principle know as "the deep pocket." If there is an injury/loss of property, the insurance company will go after the indiviudal with the assets, regardless of most other considerations. The uninsured instructor? Unless they own signifigant assests, not likely to be a target. The insured propety owner, whether responsible for the accident or not? Yup, very likely to be a target, because there's the werewithal to pay a settlement.


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

The lesson with the friend would be on their own horse. When they took the lesson with me, they used their horse and one of ours.

No trailer.

They told another boarder they are putting lessons "on hold" for the time being.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

So no lessons with you or the "friend"?


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

Alwaysbehind said:


> So no lessons with you or the "friend"?


Nope.

The 'friend' is an odd duck. I have some guesses as to what is going on, but honestly do not care. They came in as short term boarders so I have not invested a ton of one on one with them. I answer any questions and they know I am available if needed.


----------

