Rider test riding horse sues owners - News

Nookster

Nookster

Active Member
Oct 21, 2002
7,014
1
38
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...ilt-20-ops-test-riding-horse-sues-owners.html


Find this article hard to digest to be honest

‘Experienced’ rider who goes to view a horse that’s advertised for ‘free’ as owner lost confidence due to a fall. Did that not ring any questions with her at all ?

Sue culture is getting out of hand. When things go bad everyone is out for themselves

Did she not have rider insurance?

Whats your opinion?
 
I saw this and it does disturb me somewhat. If this case is proven where does that leave RS, Training Yards, Joe Public letting their friend have a quick go on their horse?

I would have thought that it really should be thrown out of court again - after all ANY horse can throw a tantrum at any point in their lifetime cant they? Like a lot of animals it is totally unpredictable and I would assume that anyone riding and looking after horses is aware of that, and accept that risk as part of enjoying horses?

I dont think we can accept any newspaper reporting at face value, we cant be sure we are getting all the facts from both sides in this matter can we? I can only say that for several years, when viewing horses I will never, ever get on a horse until I have seen owner or somebody else ride the horse first.

I came unstuck once trying a 'quiet' 5 year old before its owner rode it for me. My bum had hardly touched the saddle before the 'quiet' horse did a credible bucking bronco performance all around the yard! Lesson learnt! Owner didnt seem overly surprised either.:devil:

It does read that the horse was being offered free because it had known issues with being ridden and the girl was aware of that, if that is true then much as I pity her for her suffering and injuries, she took the chance didnt she?

If she wins, what happens when people are trying to sell horses, do we refuse to let prospective purchasers try them in case we end up being sued? Tis a minefield isnt it?:unsure:
 
I am horrified that this even reached court. Common sense should say rider not that experienced+free horse=potential accident

However on the few times I have had a horse to sell for someone we watch the prospective 'tryer' very carefully with the horse on the ground and talk about their intentions for the horse and if in doubt ask them to just ride one of our schoolmasters first, not everyone has that luxury however!

I have on two occasions refused to let a prospective purchaser mount and once stopped the trial after a walk round. All three were people buying for their children!!
 
Last edited:
EML your post reminded me of taking a holiday 3 years ago out in the west. Booked a morning trek with a local yard, they asked could I ride? I said yes I could but was a nervous oldy. When I got there they (quite rightly) asked me to ride one of their horses for 10 minutes in the menage.

No problem, they seemed delighted and brought out the horse that was to be my mount for the beach ride. Lovely looking bay connieX type. Off we went, with me being asked to take up the rear.

OMG! Was liking riding something strung to the moon, when we reached the beach I was still lapping at flat out gallop and jumping every damned water gully whilst the rest were waiting to go home.:redcarded:

When we got back the YO informed me (with a huge grin on his face)that the horse was a 4 year old that had been broken 3 weeks and had never been allowed out on a trek before because they were waiting for the right rider!:eek:

Could only happen in Ireland - I wonder if I had come off if a court over here would have allowed me to sue? I doubt it somehow.:biggrin:
 
It is the "Daily Fail" who have a sterling reputation for reporting the sensational side only of a story. Interesting to note too though that every single published comment below the story says that the lady is wrong to pursue the case, that horses have a mind of their own and that riding is a risk sport.

I am not clear what legal principle (sp?) she thinks upholds her case. Does anyone know what responsibility the Animals Act, puts on animal keepers? Or indeed what the term 'strictly liable' actuallly means in this context?

After all, bucking is not an unheard of characteristic of the horse so how her barrister thinks he can win an argument based on "'characteristics', not normally found in their species, which create a risk of serious injury" is not at all clear.

Bonkers!
 
Liability for animals changed under a case called 'Mirvahedy' where it was ruled that the keeper of the horses was liable for the injuries they caused by escaping even though their was no suggestion of negligence..hence 'strict liability'. It actually saw the death of many small Riding Schoools as insurance premiums shot up.

If this thinking was ever transfered to people riding horses I suspect Riding Schools would simply cease to exist. Heath and Safety is one thing but being liable for a horse being a horse.... totally onerous.
 
I’m of the same opinion Cortrasna – any horse can act in any ‘unpredictable’ manner and have experienced this with most horses I have had the pleasure of knowing throughout my life. They are after all living creatures and not robots. You can never ‘promise’ someone they will be ‘perfect’.

Newspapers I agree can be harsh and not report everything, on basic fact of her suing though I feel its unjust and she should sadly take responsibility for the accident as she got on of her own free will and judgement.

EML – that’s what keeps sticking in my mind that this horse was ‘free’ and sadly in today’s world free means potential issues

Makes you extremely aware of how at risk you are as an owner. I did have a time of letting a friends 4yr old ride my sec a – but due to time restrictions this stopped over winter and I’m not sure I will be starting the favour back up. Sadly when people are involved things turn sour as soon as they feel they have been done wrong by and accidents increase this tendency even more.

I remember a RS I visited when I was younger when visiting Scotland – rode a horse out on a trek, lots of fast work and lots of jumping. I struggled constantly to get the horse over the jumps with some damn nasty stops (I remember thinking it was me) on the last log jump back I remember the RI determined I needed to stay back and wait atleast 5 mins until they were nearly out of sight with the other horses as mine would jump the last jump if I did this (god knows why alarm bells didn’t ring then) I did wait, we set off at a very fast canter, got to the jump n I was promptly dumped hitting face first into the log/tree, I held on to the reins as outdoors and sadly lost all the skin off my hand doing so as I was so scared to loose their horse as I had fallen off….

Long story short – no one helped me up, I had blood pouring from my face and hand and all the RI were interested in were beating the horse themselves over the jump as it ‘had to learn’ and making me sign the accident waiver book……..

I had heard later that this particular horse had dumped several riders over the past few months as it had stopped jumping for everyone – probably due to the beatings it was getting – hardly a confidence builder for the poor thing

I never once thought of suing! Took weeks for my hand to mend, but I blamed myself for no gloves, never once thought I should blame the school for not checking I was wearing any.
 
It was being given away, that speaks volumes.
Owner desperate to let go, they would have at least talked about what it did.

I went to view horse that shot off round school while I was leading it. Owner who wouldn't ride him, had saddle. I said no thank you and left..
 
This is very close to me but I don't know that lady. I can believe that she is in a lot of pain but she should have insurance and as an "experienced rider" (to quote the Daily Fail) I agree she should have recognised the risks of riding an unknown horse that had previously thrown a rider. You can't take the press at face value but this is certainly worrying. Although it says she rode for 10 mins without incident it doesn't say whether she saw it ridden first and isn't clear about whether it spooked or might have been in pain.

I'll be keeping an eye out for this in the local rags.
 
I feel for her pain but we all know the risks involved in riding horses!!!! as an experienced rider she must know that they can be unpredictable and its never going to be a totally safe hobby/sport/way of life.
 
I read it in the telegraph so it's not only the Mail that have picked up on it:smile:

If you know it's free because the owner has fallen off and lost confidence and you're daft enough to get on it - tough luck if you get thrown off

Yes, it must have been a sore one but I really dont think this case should have got as far as the Court of Appeal - the local court threw it out and IMO were right to do so

It has huge implications for RS etc if she wins the case
 
It should get thrown out of court as it did the first time.

You choose to get on a horse and its a blooming animal with a mind of its own not a machine.

And not all free horses are nutters, I have to refute that sweeping statement ;)
 
I am not surprised. Common sense and the law don't always coincide. I was looking into getting insurance when I had Minnie for sale for fear of something like that. The insurance agent actually said that the insurance wouldn't cover this type of thing and that the potential buyer would need to sign a waiver (fine with me -paper to sign is way cheaper than an insurance policy)
 
Black Beastie said:
It should get thrown out of court as it did the first time.

You choose to get on a horse and its a blooming animal with a mind of its own not a machine.

And not all free horses are nutters, I have to refute that sweeping statement ;)
Click to expand...

BB - Where's the statement that says that? Not being picky but just cant find it:smile: was it in the Daily Mail ?
 
If I go to a RS, I have reasonable expectation that their horses won't do anything spectacular like rear or really dangerous things. An odd silly spook I might accept and can sit to. Having said that, I still leave out that odd 10% where something more serious could happen as said above, they are not machines and I personally have been on the receiving end of a rather good bucking session and I broke my arm. But the RS had a sign saying 'You ride at your own risk' which surely should protect them from any personal claim taken out against them.
 
'Riding is a risk sport' is the favourite phrase drawn to people attention in the RS situation. Every RS will have a record of every fall/mishap/misbehaviour recording the rider/horse/incident and reason. This record is usually inspected as part of the annual licence check.

There is as I said above however a big difference between being liable for falls due to the instructors negligence than those caused by a horse being a horse. I will take extra precautions if for example weather is windy or there is noise from a local shoot as even the most spook proof RS horse can be startled. What I cannot ever do, and nor can anyone, is guarantee riders will never fall off or damage themselves.

'You ride at your own risk ' has no legal status or meaning in the UK although in the USA you can waiver liability.
 
Sorry but while I'm sorry the lady has been hurt it remains her own fault for trying the horse when she knew it was dicy. Think she should have realised that little is given away in this world,there is always a catch.Not saying that someone getting given a friend's horse because they are unable to keep it for a genuine reason is dicy but a stranger giving you a horse for nothing ? Come on you don't believe in Santa do you. EML I sympathise with you ,it must be a problem at a riding school
 
As has been said even the most sanest of horses can have an off day, hacked out on Panda with a friend on young cob, for some reason out of the blue truck coming towards us, Panda went vertical, spun and we ended up facing the opposite direction! Thankfully all ok, poor friend, cob did a 180, but at least feet stayed on the ground and stopped quickly. Have no idea why this happened had owned Panda 3 years and she's always been brilliant on the roads, with normal traffic, this was only a small truck - didn't like being overtaken by a combine once but then neither did I!
I'm afraid free horse equals rider be very aware and take responsibility, another friend of mine was scared to ride her horse as kept bucking her off, she thought it was her, I rode it - well that's not strictly true I was just sitting on him - I ended up being catapulted at the hedge, my responsibilty!
 
If she is trying to say that she is an experienced rider, you would have thought that she would have given a photo to the paper which shows off what she can do. The photo of her jumping a tiny cross pole with reins like washing lines does nothing to prove her case. Even I look better than that and I consider myself an eternal novice.

The case was right to be thrown out of court and I will be shocked if the appeal is sucessful.
 
1. She happily rode the horse for 20 mins in trot and canter, therefore proving that the horse wasn’t inherently ‘bad’, if she was she’d have been unlikely to have ridden him happily for that length of time.
2. She was purchasing a ‘free’ horse, that implies to me that she might not be in the strongest of positions financially
3. She is an ‘experienced’ rider. I too am an experienced rider. I’m not necessarily a ‘good’ rider.
4. If I was going to let the paper’s have a picture of me riding to show that I’m an experienced rider, it wouldn’t be the one that has been published.
When I worked at the RS we regularly got people turning up who told us they were ‘experienced’ and asked if we could ‘go for a gallop’, usually you can judge before someone has even got on if you’re going to allow this! I had a raft of excuses saved up, usually involving unfavourable ground conditions! (One rider turned up and claimed to be experienced and tried to mount an 18.2hh from the ground, whilst the horse was tied up and the girth still loose! Funny what people ‘forget’ to check!!!)
 
newrider.com
Top Bottom
Back