Link to the report?
Link to the report?
Again just to re-iterate what has been said-- THE REPORTED 'FACTS' WERE WRONG!
No Broken Jaw
No $7,000 vet bill to be paid with donations
The vet bill was $4500--not the $7,000 that was reported as fact, not the $10,000 that was reported as fact before the $7,000
The horse was released from UC Davis and still the new owner, who did nothing other than purchase a horse from a bad situation, can not get him home.
The horse is an asset and there are judgments outstanding for JBs bills not paid. It could be that JB cannot sell property without first paying off the creditors - so that any horse sales could be held up in legal or by creditors seeking payment. It makes anyone wanting the buy an asset from JB to think twice as to whether she is free to sell off assets without court or legal entanglements.
Wow. Paying $4500 for what amounts to a few days of NSAID/ABX followed by some dedicated use of 4x4 gauze and a weak tea of betadine and some dabs of abx ointment? If that was me, I'd be livid. Scratch that, I'd be beyond livid.
To the best of my knowledge there is NO legality preventing Jill from selling horses off. There are judgements against her, but with no action then taken by the courts. As mentioned a zillion posts ago, a judgement does nothing other than to affirm a debt is owed, unless it then says how that debt is to be resolved.
I found the vet report (on the Rising Star Facebook page).
The way I read it RS was found with one eye swollen shut and the other eye almost swollen shut and his face/head swollen.
Though he was found to not have a broken jaw I can see why those injuries not being treated at all are grounds to do something with him.
Yup, but it probably didn't rise to the level of preventing him from going to his new home where he would have received care and feeding except for the fact that other horses were in much poorer condition and the facilities are awful and the whole thing is just a mess.
But if you take RS's case alone, the care he received was not care that is typically done in a clinic setting unless the horse is owned or managed by people utterly incapable of handling a horse and providing minimal level treatment (or insanely rich and helping out the vet school funding). Horse people - experienced horse people - are somewhat accomplished in giving meds (oral, IV and IM) and cleaning/treating minor wounds, we all know this is what you sign up for when you own horses.
If this had happened at any other farm without the complicating factors, chances are the vet would have come out, dispensed abx/nsaids, stained the eye, given some trx instructions and potentially xrayed the jaw to rule out broken bones, but maybe not if the horse was eating normally and not distressed. Chances are a vet dealing with an experienced horseman wouldn't even have scheduled a f/u visit, and instead would rely on said owner to call if the condition changed. I'm thinking if this happened to me I would have been out $400-600, tops (less because I wouldn't need any supplies/meds from the vet except abx).
So yeah, I can see where that bill is pretty stupifying if I was faced with paying it and I wasn't the person who did anything other than enter into a legal transaction that would have ultimately benefited the horse. It's true that no good deed goes unpunished.
Perhaps the RS could have been treated as an outpatient, thus reducing a potential vet bill, if only he had been able to get care without needing to be seized. :(
eta: I haven't had to make any claims yet, knock on wood, but wouldn't insurance normally cover some of the bill? I'd assume a horse like RS would be covered...?
That may depend on whether RSF's insurance was in effect on him when he got injured - the time frame seems tight between purchase and injury. I'd be surprised if JB had him insured, given her bill paying habits.
Right.. No broken jaw but he did have:
So we have a stallion, with a BCS score of 3. He has one eye swollen completely closed with an corneal ulcer. He has multiple broken teeth, various lacerations and swelling.Quote:
Right eye swollen shut with marked edema – right eye is swollen completely shut but can be manually opened with some force”
Lacerations under eye
superficial corneal ulcer
Blood present coming from the mouth
Fracture of 104 to gingival, fracture of 304 into three fragments, uncomplicated fracture of 404. The vet goes on to described feed packing and teeth in various stages of decay.
multiple buccal mucosal ulcers bilaterally in the region of the inter dental space (associated with trauma and not from enamel points)
Edema of the right foreleg was also appreciated and of the pectoral muscles between the forelimbs (described as a 2-3 inch thick pocket)
Ribs visible on both sides, but vertebrae still covered with muscle
Long feet x 4
Okay, his jaw wasn’t broken, but his teeth were – and his eye was swollen shut – and he had not been treated by a vet.
This is “okay” how?
I leafed through the report and found the horse was radiographed for the head injury, treated for an eye injury, dental extractions for broken teeth, etc, alongside wound care and was hospitalized for quite a while while requiring frequent medication (one of which is GastroGard), which means that his hospitalization cost alone was probably decent.
the bill itself is not outrageous. It's that it does not rise to the level of 6 weeks admission. That's not UCDavis' fault, but in any other normal case, this horse would have a)never went to a clinic setting and b) if he had, in an abundance of caution, would have probably been released in 48 hours, tops. The fact that there was a new legal owner asking for him to be released does beg the question of why he was not released? And if there was some dispute as to that ownership/final resolution, why was the horse not released to a lower cost/more appropriate level of care, such as a boarding facility?
He clearly needed food and some basic care (trim, dental, etc. - none of which were attributed to injury but rather age/neglect) but do you take your horse to the equivalent of an inpatient hospital admission to do that? BCS of 3 is horrible IMO, but does not rise to the level of seizure if one goes by the many horses in JB's care that are BCS 3 and not getting follow up visits by our last accounts,so why does this BCS rise to the level of an i/p admit?
I suspect if the reason he stayed there is the MHS didn't have the facilities to handle the horse so he stayed at UCDavis and the bill kept going ka ching ka ching (purely my speculation based on reading the entire bill). He's a big tough stallion by all accounts and I bet wiping his owies off with betadine tea wasn't easy unless you were experienced in handling horses. That's fine - if MHS can't handlethe seized horses and they got the contract/revenue/responsibility to care for, maybe they should look inward and get some help in handling these kind of cases. If you have to resort to this level of cost/care management to take care of of this level of medical management in your seizures, I don't know that this is the best use of Marin Co taxpayer funds, but I don't live there, so it's NMP...
But if you were the person who bought the horse in good faith BEFORE any of this happened, would you want to pay that bill? Would you wonder what there was about this case that warranted the horse not being released to your care much earlier? And because you happened to be caught in the middle of this you now have to fight (read: spend more money) to get the horse released? And for bonus points, get your name drug through the mud by various mini-minions and alters on this thread?
I don't think anyone is saying the condition of the horse was okay. It certainly sounds like he had the crap beat out of him. I also think his care was actually appropriate; sounds like there were serious concerns about his eyes and his jaw/facial structures. Thus the rads, optho consults, etc. But it is important to have accurate information, and there is a difference between a broken jaw vs. non-broken jaw, as well as a BCS of 1 vs. 3.
As far as the charges go, I don't think any of us arm-chair quarterbacks can remark upon that. If you read the entire report he had a ton of work done; multiple rounds of blood-work, fecals, PCR for EVA, optho consults, rads, etc. etc. That's all going to add up, especially at a large university institution. Sounds like he was quite beat up and in need of care. UC Davis would also be very careful to dot their "I's" and cross their "T's" knowing this case would probably end up in litigation.
I just hope he can go to Ronda soon, settle in, and get on with his life.
hillside, I can say I have never had a horse stay at a vet school without daily blood work, etc. That's just part of your daily admit routine (and daily care charges) in my experience (and I wish I had less experience). And um, mine were not any where near a BCS of 3... or 4... or 5... or 6... They even get blood work between discharge notice and me picking them up.
Nobody said it was Okay. Don't put words in my mouth. What I said is that the 'facts' that had been presented on this thread again and again and again by persons who claimed to have insider knowledge on the condition of the horse and the costs associated were wrong.
Remember all the discussion of a body score of '1' and him nearly being put down and having a broken jaw?
At first we were given a vet bill in the $10,000 range and climbing. Then a report came out and said in the $7000 range. In reality it was $4500. Yes, for treatment he needed. Nobody is disputing that--just that the actual paperwork doesn't jive with the 'insider' knowledge presented and taken verbatim by a lot of participants in this thread.
That was the only point. So if those presented facts were wrong, what else has been? Only actual documentation like what has been made public can give a clearer picture.
And as DMK said, *if* this horse would have been anywhere else, he would not have required hospitalization for routine care.
I'm simply saying that none of us were directly involved in the case, so none of us can accurately determine what the horse did/did not need care wise, so I'm not sure why we are even discussing if the horse should/should not have been hospitalized in the manner in which it was?
As far as daily blood-work, I think that depends upon why the horse is in the hospital. I've certainly had horses in a University setting (orthopedic though, not medical) and they definitely did NOT do daily bloodwork. It's a case-by-case basis.
Did they (the MHS) communicate with RS about the treatment and condition of the horse? Did they call her and say "hey, we seized your horse at the owners, he was in bad shape. He is at UC Davis, please call the vet." Did they work with her to come up with a treatment alternative that didn't involve such expensive care? Or when they thought there was a jaw fracture and potentially high vet bills, did they offer her the chance to choose an alternative such as euthanasia? It doesn't sound like they engaged her in the process of care for her horse at all. If it was my horse, I'd sue. Just because you are a non-profit doesn't mean you can dick people around.Quote:
She's all the way on the other coast, and gets involved in this mess... Then when HER horse needs to be physically rescued and treated from painful and possibly life threatening injuries she shows up out of the woodwork? THEN wants to sue the agency that stepped in and got him care?? SERIOUSLY?????