# possible law suit?



## appylover31803 (Sep 18, 2007)

If you purchased a horse and medical/physical conditions were not told to you, even if you asked, could you possibly sue the person who sold the horse?


----------



## Gingerrrrr (Feb 12, 2008)

i would think so if they had known. but im not too sure.


----------



## Mike_User (Oct 24, 2006)

I would imagine you could if they lied about or hid problems that would have impacted your decision to buy the horse or the value you paid for it.


----------



## Gingerrrrr (Feb 12, 2008)

Administrator said:


> I would imagine you could if they lied about or hid problems that would have impacted your decision to buy the horse or the value you paid for it.


exactly. and since hypp is a serious thing and may have impacted your decision to buy vega (im assuming thats who your talking about) i think you could sue since they lied/ didnt tell you.


----------



## appylover31803 (Sep 18, 2007)

It's actually not about Vega. I'm assuming they knew, or could have atleast told me, but it hasn't affected what I had planned for her.

I was talking about Gem. Even though we didn't buy him to be a jumper or anything, we have spent a lot of money on him with the vets/x-rays/shoeing (there it was trims that just never got done) and the supplements.


----------



## farmpony84 (Apr 21, 2008)

I would think you would have to prove that they knew about the condition... I'm not sure how you could do that.....


----------



## appylover31803 (Sep 18, 2007)

oh good point!


----------



## Moxie (May 28, 2008)

Actually a lot of those types of deals are as is, unless specified in a contract. It would be hard to determine whether or not the selling party knew about the health of the horse before hand, unless of course there is a paper trail. 

Civil litigation is can be very lengthy and expensive. Our courts right now are backed up like you wouldn't believe. In the county I live in, our courts are looking at 18 mos to 2 yrs for a spot on the docket. 

My advice is that if you or someone you know is thinking about pursuing a civil suit I would talk to a lawyer first and foremost to see if there is any merit at all, it could be that you could nail the seller for misrepresentation of the horse. 

On a personal note: When we bought our mini bulldog, we were told that she was in perfect health, and for the most part she is. Except for the fact that she is extremely allergic to vaccinations, and now could potentially have mange. So yea.. I've spent a large amount of money on this dog that was supposed to be in perfect health. I could probably go back to the breeder and see what he could do for me, but.. I know I would get no where because like I said before, a lot of those deals are 'as is'.


----------



## appylover31803 (Sep 18, 2007)

I don't think Tom and I would pursue it.
I have a feeling they knew (Gem had surgery, had abcesses.. all while at that place) and none of it was told to us. We found out through other people there about stuff. And when he bucked me off, the vet said that his back pain was from an ill fitting saddle (we rarely rode and if we did it was for like 10 min. max, so I don't think it would have been from our saddles) The vet also said that a lot of hard work would cause his arthritis. Again we were not riding him. We felt bad that he was a lesson/camp/trail horse and was giving him time to be a horse. So we knew that we weren't working him hard at all.

Would we still have bought Gem knowing all of this? Yes. But it just would have been nice to know everything, and I know that we would have gotten him to feel better a heck of a lot sooner than we did.

Thank you everyone for your help


----------



## farmpony84 (Apr 21, 2008)

...and this is why my pony has been for sale for... how long? Because I don't have that "horse trader" mentality... You know... Omit the important stuff like previous injuries or dangerous vices.... yeah.... gotta love it...


----------



## QtrHorse (Oct 13, 2008)

*Vet checks really help - theirs and yours*

Here in Switzerland we have a 10 day "return-*for-any-reason*-what-so-ever policy". However, I have found that when it comes to spending money on a horse it is very helpful to have the seller agree to having their vet come out for an inspection of the animal prior to purchase. You should be there and discuss the horse with the vet and its past history. The owner should be agreeable to this. If not, a big red flag. I ask them to pay for the visit.
The second visit should be done by your vet or another independant vet and the extent of the exam should reflect the purchase price of the horse. For instance a pleasure horse does not need x-rays, a show or breed horse will.
A few years ago I lost a very expensive investment stallion to "wobblers" so make sure the vet can do a proper neuro exam.
The 10 day trial makes it very nice as you can discover many things about a horse during that period. Perhaps it is something you can negotiate with a seller there in the US.


----------



## NoFear526 (Sep 4, 2008)

I have been told you can.

I just had a bad deal with a girl over the horse I had.

I bought her, was told she was in perfect health, the girl got her from Canada when she was three, and she was now four. She said she had broken her and done everything.

I got the Warmblood mare home, and found out immediately from a vet that she had a pretty serious heart murmur, and she was between 6-7 years old.
I asked the girl if she had had her vetted before, and she said yes many times. 
I told her about the heart murmur, and requested copies of all the mare's previous vet records (the girl told me a vet had never told her that before, which is why I wanted the proof)... and never heard back from her.

I had put a deposit on the mare, and was going to do a lease-to-buy to finish paying for her. After that incident, I never sent her anymore money. After not hearing from her for a couple weeks, I sent her an e-mail in attempts to contact her again. I basically told her that I was not willing to pay that price we stated anymore because of the heart murmur. That in order to Event with this mare like I wanted, I would have to do further heart tests and evaluations to find out just how severe it was. And I wanted to do this, because I really liked the mare. I told her that if we could come to an agreement, that'd be great, but I wasn't sending any payments until we could come to one, and I saw that her vets had cleared this mare with "no heart murmur". I told her if she didn't want to work something out, she could come pick up the mare then, and the lease would be terminated, with no purchase at the end obviously either.

Never heard back from her.

I have since sold the mare, she was not what the girl told me she was.
She, honestly, I believe had neurological issues. She was very two-faced, and almost spaztic. I have to wonder if she was beaten at some point in time, since obviously the girl didn't get her when she was three. Who knows where the poor horse had come from.
I just didn't have the time to work with her, she had too many issues that I was unaware of. 

I have been waiting to see if she was going to come at me. But honestly, she'd be stupid to. I have Navy Legal on my side (My husband is Military) and she wouldn't win.
She obviously got scared when I found out everything and confronted her, and just wanted to wash her hands of the mare for only the deposit I gave her. 

Anyhow though...
Yes, if its something serious, I think most definitely you could sue.


----------



## Harlee rides horses (Jan 13, 2008)

You would have to prove they knew about it, probably through vet check-ups.

But if it was unknown to them, then it couldn't be a law suit and it would be your fault for buying a horse with a medical condition and not having a pre-purchase vet check.

Or so I would assume.


----------



## appylover31803 (Sep 18, 2007)

I wouldn't say it our fault.. i mean it is, but we were going to get him regardless. My fiance fell in love with him and just had to have him.

I have a feeling they knew about his arthritis or suspected it. But there were other medical conditions that he had that we were never told of and they definitely knew about it.

I guess it's all water under the bridge now anyways.
I was just curious if anything could happen.


----------



## Snapple122 (Aug 8, 2008)

I don't understand why you'd buy a horse without having a vet check on it first.. 
Yes, they should have told you if they knew of any health issues, but it's your responsibility to get the horse vet checked before you buy it.


----------



## appylover31803 (Sep 18, 2007)

^^ does it really matter that I didn't get a vet check on him first? 
Like i said, we didn't buy him for him to be a jumper or anything, we got him basically because my fiance fell in love with him and to "rescue" him.


----------



## Snapple122 (Aug 8, 2008)

um, ok 

then why are you talking about sueing the people you "rescued" it from? 
That makes absolutely no sense at all


----------



## Gingerrrrr (Feb 12, 2008)

Snapple122 said:


> um, ok
> 
> then why are you talking about sueing the people you "rescued" it from?
> That makes absolutely no sense at all



you are really being rude...


----------



## NorthernMama (Mar 12, 2008)

Snapple122 said:


> um, ok
> 
> then why are you talking about sueing the people you "rescued" it from?
> That makes absolutely no sense at all


She didn't say she would sue them -- she asked a hypothetical question based on a real-life scenario I think. Something to take under her hat for future maybe, or just for interests sake, or to see if there would be any validity in claiming any $ -- maybe to help with vet bills or who knows what. I wouldn't be so quick to say it doesn't make sense.


----------



## SonnyWimps (Feb 22, 2008)

Snapple, both Appy and her BF, Tom, has put LOADS of money into Gem...money that might have been not spent if they knew the problems ahead of time.

She never said she would sue, she just wondered if she could. It's nice to know for future reference also.

And many people don't do a pre-purcahse exam before buying. It's not a crime if you don't.


----------



## Snapple122 (Aug 8, 2008)

No, it's not a crime if you don't do a vet check, but then it's your own fault if the horse isn't healthy. 

I'm not even going to say anything more, because this argument is very pointless. If they had done a vet check, they would have known these problems.


----------



## appylover31803 (Sep 18, 2007)

just to clear somethings up.

We did NOT get him from a rescue. I said that we "rescued" him. He was being worked into the ground, was not given proper care, was whipped and abused (I know this because I saw how those same people treated both their lesson horses AND their boarders' horses)

I am not looking to sue them, I was just wondering if one could sue based on something similar to that.

It was my first time buying a horse and almost every site out there says to get a horse from the place you're taking lessons from or a barn (I started taking lessons there and it was a barn.. seemed nice) So I didn't feel a need to get a pre-purchase exam done (I of course, was thinking that every barn treated all their horses like gold.. based on the last barn I was at). So that is why we didn't do anything. We thought we would be better off getting them (we bought a mare the same time as Gem) from there than a private party. As time went on, we realized that that barn had a bad reputation and have heard of a lot of problems with horses being bought from there.
But when you're knew to the area, it's hard to tell IMO.

We have invested a lot of time and money into Gem since we found out about his conditions. I guess it just would have been nice to know before hand, but it didn't work out like that. No big deal. 

Snapple, I do appreciate your comments  I was just trying to understand if something COULD happen. I'm only 21 and still have a lot to learn.
Yes I have learned that from now on to always get a pre-purchase done on a horse to know EXACTLY what is wrong so there are not hidden surprises down the road.
I did not want this to turn into an arugment, i was just trying to understand.


----------



## Snapple122 (Aug 8, 2008)

appy, sorry.. I wasn't trying to start anything.

It's not your fault.. you didn't know. I'm juat saying that you should always do a vet check.


----------



## appylover31803 (Sep 18, 2007)

Snapple, it's really ok

Like I said, I know for next time, and I know if the person says that there's nothing wrong, there usually is 

There was this one horse I was looking into getting. He seemed to have a lot wrong with him (Underweight, abcesses, possible founder rings) that was not told to me via e-mail with the owner. I was planning on getting a vet check and deciding after if I wanted him, but the owner refused my offer (She wanted 750 for him, i said 400.. which I thought was fair based on his condition and lack of training) Anyways, long story short, I didn't get him, but I'm still curious as to what a vet check would have found.


----------



## Tazmanian Devil (Oct 11, 2008)

Other posters are correct - you would have to prove that the people knew about the condition ahead of time. That is usually rather easy to do (find their vet or anyone they discussed the condition with) but is only part of the story.

To be actionable, you must prove that they intentionally mis-represented the condition. A horse could be broken down, sick and have 6 months to live... nothing wrong with selling or buying it. The problem comes in if the owner represents this as a "healthy" horse.

The next problems that must be overcome would be the owner's defense if the matter was pursued. People, even when they are 100% right, fail to consider what the _other_ party will state in their defense.

Failing to get a vet check would be used against you (or anyone). The defendant would state "Vet Checks are standard. If they were that concerned about this supposed condition, they would have had a vet check. It obviously wasn't a concern."

And of course, there is what you just wrote:



appylover31803 said:


> which I thought was fair based on his condition and lack of training)


The owner would absolutely use this against you, claiming you knew about this obvious "condition" and didn't care. Hey, that's why the price was so low! If not for the condition, the price would have been much higher, as you clearly stated! You just realized that the "training" was over your head and want to go back on the deal.


The only possible way around this is a written contract which specifically states the horse is "sound" and "healthy." Possible because they would still use the above defenses. A contract would (probably) constitute a representation by the seller. From there, if you get a vet to testify "I told them the horse wasn't sound/healthy on this date, and here is my written report" you would likely have them on breach or contract/fraud.

Legal action always sound good, but it never as easy as you think. Unfortunately, it is sometimes the only recourse.


----------



## sandy2u1 (May 7, 2008)

I go to all the horse sales in my area. the way it works (here anyway)...all horses fall into 1 of 2 categories.....sound or as is. sound means that it is 100% healthy as far as the seller knows...and if that turns out not to be the case then the owner must take the horse back and refund the money. as is...well at the last sale i went to the auctioner said "if the horse falls into 3 pieces, then they are the buyers 3 pieces...no owner responsibility" I know you didnt get yours from a sale...but im assuming they are going by the law in that aspect. I just thought it was good information. Im a new horse owner as well. Also, at the horse sales...sound does not mean rideable! just healthy! I was suprised by that.


----------



## PaintHorseMares (Apr 19, 2008)

sandy2u1 said:


> I go to all the horse sales in my area. the way it works (here anyway)...all horses fall into 1 of 2 categories.....sound or as is. sound means that it is 100% healthy as far as the seller knows...and if that turns out not to be the case then the owner must take the horse back and refund the money. as is...well at the last sale i went to the auctioner said "if the horse falls into 3 pieces, then they are the buyers 3 pieces...no owner responsibility" .


Be aware that most sellers/breeders I've delt with always write 'as-is' on the bill of sale, not because there is anything wrong, but to protect themselves from potential law suits.


----------



## xkatex (Oct 7, 2007)

This is why i always bring atleast two other people with me when going to look at the horse. If you clearly stated "Does this horse have any medical etc conditions" and they gave a clear "no" and it turns out they do have issues, there is enough there to cause a lawsuit ONLY if there is a vet record of it. If there is no vet record the seller could say "well I didnt know". If there is a vet record with an ailment listed and you were not clear told after asking about it, yes you can have a possible lawsuit. We usually ask before we come see the horse if they could have all updated vet record/farrier records available just incase.

And this is why I hate auctions. It the same around here. If the word "sound" is not written anywhere....BEWARE. People have ways of hiding ailments so at the time of the sale no one can tell the difference. Also I know with standardbreds at some sales they test the horses before hand for drugs (like bute and tranqs and stuff) but I have been told at auctions they dont do it all the time. So that nice quite and sound horse could turn out to be mr.super psycho.

Just be careful, always have atleast ONE extremely horse saavy person with you when going to look at a possible buy. ALWAYS ask for any and all medical records and a past owners list if available. 

Good Luck with your horse!


----------



## my2geldings (Feb 18, 2008)

Moxie said:


> Actually a lot of those types of deals are as is, unless specified in a contract. It would be hard to determine whether or not the selling party knew about the health of the horse before hand, unless of course there is a paper trail.
> 
> Civil litigation is can be very lengthy and expensive. Our courts right now are backed up like you wouldn't believe. In the county I live in, our courts are looking at 18 mos to 2 yrs for a spot on the docket.
> 
> ...


Outside of horses, in order for you to be able to get after someone and be successful, you have to be able to prove that it's something that was present prior to. WOuld you have access to vet work or diagnostic imaging work that was done BEFORE you bought the horse? By law the clinics are not allowed to release any information BUT I would try to see if there is someone else in the field that might be able to help you get your hands on this stuff.

One good reason why I prefer to buy a youngters over a grown horse any day because you can rule out a lot of problems and not fear as much.

Keep us posted on the outcome. I really feel sorry you are going thru this


----------



## appylover31803 (Sep 18, 2007)

We're not going through with any legal things with Gem's previous owners. To us it's not worth the time or money because we have Gem and are healing him up.
He's already made tons of improvements and with each farrier visit is getting better and better.

it just sucks that we went through this, but I'm actually happy we did. It has taught me a lot.


----------



## my2geldings (Feb 18, 2008)

appylover31803 said:


> We're not going through with any legal things with Gem's previous owners. To us it's not worth the time or money because we have Gem and are healing him up.
> He's already made tons of improvements and with each farrier visit is getting better and better.
> 
> it just sucks that we went through this, but I'm actually happy we did. It has taught me a lot.


Happy to see someone who is grateful for the great horse that they have. I've spend the better part of my day listening to people complain about the most ridiculous things and it's nice to see someone being so positive. You are very fortunate to have such a great horse and he is one lucky horse to have you as mom. Those are some of the great gifts of life and brightens my day up. 
Take Care


----------



## QtrHorse (Oct 13, 2008)

Usually it is buyer beware. The general rule is assume nothing. If in a written advertisement or sales contract they made statements which you are able to dispute and reasonably prove as being false you have some support to your claim. They said or didn't say is pretty worthless. However, you can pursue in small claims if your financial claim meets the guidelines and you don't go with an attorney.
You can also check into "lemon law" regs in your region.


----------

