# Broken contract, will this do?



## close2prfct (Mar 9, 2009)

More than likely you will have to take them to small claims court and let the judge decide who gets "custody" of the horse. That would be the best way to avoid getting into any trouble yourself. Cops cannot enforce "contracts" that is a civil matter that will have to be handled in court. They can however, if they feel the horse is being neglected or abused seize it for animal cruelty charges which it will go to a boarding facility of their choice pending an investigation and outcome
hope this helps


----------



## Spyder (Jul 27, 2008)

Liquidmetal said:


> Right, so I think I've found a loophole. I happen to be the horse's barefoot trimmer...if the owner doesn't call me in 4 weeks to trim the horse's hooves as agreed to in the contract - she's broken it and I can take the horse back, right?


 
Actually no. I see the barefoot clause in your contract but not where they have to call *you* specifically.

If you try to regain ownership you would have to do it under the followig clause.

_If at any time, the current owner is unable to keep ******* in the conditions described above, the previous owner, xxxxxxxxxx, will have the option of regaining ownership of *******_


----------



## Miss Katie (Dec 30, 2007)

Very true. They are under no obligation to call you to trim the horse.

Your contract also completly skipped over what you deam to be an acceptible body condition. So unless they are not keeping her outdoors and are not having SOMEONE trim her,they are not breaking your contract. Spyders suggestion is your best bet but because of the way you wrote the contract, it probably wont get you very far in terms of using a loophole to get her back.


----------



## Liquidmetal (May 2, 2009)

Ok, now if I get her to agree to contact ME to organise hoof trims (like every other normal person) in writing, (I've sent her an email) and then she doesn't contact me for 4 weeks - is that breach of contract? I imagine that the court would give her some sort of leeway - 1 or 2 weeks? I made sure she signed my last invoice stating when the trim took place, name of horse etc. 

The other alternative is that she gets another trimmer...and that way I think she will be breaching very quickly as the farriers out here have way too much on their plates is. I think about 1000+ horses to each farrier or something ridiculous. She'd be lucky if the horse saw anyone for 3 months nevermind 2. I would have to prove that the horse hadn't been seen by the farrier at 4 weeks, 5 weeks, 6 weeks and so on, pictures perhaps?

I plan to speak to a lawyer this week with regards to validity and leeways etc so that I'm ready for action if she does breech. 

I've learnt so much from this experience already - thanks for the help everyone.


----------



## Miss Katie (Dec 30, 2007)

She is under no obligation to contact you, and unless you can prove that another farrier isnt seeing the horse you cant do anything.


You probably should have spoken to the laywer BEFORE doing the contract. They could have advised you as to how to write a proper contract.


----------



## Spyder (Jul 27, 2008)

Liquidmetal said:


> Ok, now if I get her to agree to contact ME to organise hoof trims (like every other normal person) in writing, (I've sent her an email) and then she doesn't contact me for 4 weeks - is that breach of contract?


You may have problems here as a contract is already signed and you are now asking her to sign an addendum to the original contract which they are under no obligation to do. A verbal agreement to contact you will not stand up in court at this point in time.




Liquidmetal said:


> I plan to speak to a lawyer this week with regards to validity and leeways etc so that I'm ready for action if she does breech.


I agree with Miss Katie here as you should have had a lawyer in the beginning or at least someone that has done this before as they would have been aware of all the dangers involved.


My suggestion is to have a professional ( the humane society in your area or a vet) go with you to check up on the horse and act upon their assessment of the condition of your horse. If they say the horse is not being looked after, their testimony is more likely to hold up in court.
I've learnt so much from this experience already - thanks for the help everyone.[/quote]


----------



## ChingazMyBoy (Apr 16, 2009)

I guess you can really only hope for the best I hope things work out though


----------



## shmurmer4 (Dec 27, 2008)

I agree with Spyder. 

And if you would like to try the verbal contract, invest in a digital recorder make sure that only you and they are present in the conversation, also make sure they state their name or respond to it.


----------



## Tazmanian Devil (Oct 11, 2008)

As has been said, never try to play lawyer. Even a real lawyer can miss something in a contract.

According to the terms you listed, there is nothing about condition or welfare of the horse. The only requirements is that the horse live outside, stay barefoot and be trimmed every four weeks.

They don't need to use you. They don't need to use a farrier. It doesn't even have to be a good trim. They simply have to buy a file and trim by themselves every four weeks.

Technically, they don't have to feed the horse or maintain its health. Of course, that would possibly get into the animal cruelty realm and involve various laws. The point it, it would not violate the terms of your contract, nor would it necessarily give you any rights to regain ownership of the horse.

If you are going down the "ribs showing" path there is something else to consider. Did you document the condition of the horse before you transferred ownership? What if the new owner claimed they received the horse in that, or worse condition? They could claim the _you_ gave them a starving horse that is now "on the road to recovery."

Sorry to sound so negative. Only want to point out that your contract does not give you much to stand on with the situation as described. If you want the horse back, a "honey" approach may work better than a "vinegar" approach (i.e. threats, SPCA, etc.).

(disclaimer - all opinion... I am not a lawyer)


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

Ok - I will ask the question burning in the minds of all who have responded -

If you feel the need to micromanage the situation the horse is in - why in the world did you give it away?


----------



## QtrHorse (Oct 13, 2008)

I will be curious to see what your lawyer says. I do not practice contract law but the way it is worded and the 2 items that you require the new owner to satisfy are going to be to your disadvantage. The wording of the contract is vague and non-specific to the issues that really affect the quality of life for a horse. The new owner can meet your first item by providing a little run and a lean-to. The second item can be met by them going out and doing a self-trim every 4 weeks. Sorry but it is best to leave the legal jargon to the JD's.

I do want to comment that the recording of another person without their knowledge and consent may be illegal and regulated by statue in many states. 
Best to check before you are the one who gets in a bit of hot water.


----------



## Whipple (Feb 2, 2009)

I'm sorry but I highly doubt the contract will hold up at all. 

Always get an equine lawyer to look such things over, and always charge a rehoming fee. In most states a horse is property, so you have to be careful with such things as custody. If you want something done your way, you do it. Do not trust anyone, especially when its free.


----------



## Joshie (Aug 26, 2008)

Please use this to learn a valuable lesson. Ask a lawyer to write up a contract next time. Your contract says nothing about the horse's body condition, feeding, immunizations, worming, water access, 

Your contract doesn't say who they have to let do this horse's hooves. Heck, you might have difficulty defending that in court as many horses don't get their hooves done and, if a horse develops some hoof disorders, shoes might save a horse's life. Your contract says the horse cannot have shoes. 

I'm not a lawyer either but I'd bet that your contract contains some unenforceable items and leaves out an awful lot of important things. 

The thing is this...it does not appear that they even have to let you visit this horse. If you're not nice to them they may not allow you to visit this horse or know a thing about its condition.


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

Uh... I'm going to agree with mls. 

They haven't wormed it in the one month they have had it? Well, I can't say I know ANYONE who worms their horses every month. 

I also don't know anyone who has their horses feet done every 4 weeks. 

You gave the horse away. That generally means relinquishing any rights you have to it. If you were so concerned about it's treatment, why didn't you keep it?

Hav you asked them about the saddle? They may be saving for a new one. Maybe she has ribs because they are getting her fit. 

Sheesh, if anyone pulled out a contract like that for a horse they were giving to me, I would run for the hills :]


----------



## NewHeart (Dec 10, 2008)

Sorry, but I have to agree with others that there are too many loop holes in your contract. I also have to agree with mls that if you feel a need to micromanage the situation, you really should have not given the horse away.


----------

