The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May. 6, 2009
    Location
    The Left Coast
    Posts
    3,318

    Default spinoff of bolting thread: loss of use?

    Let's say you spend a small fortune for a horse that turned out to be unrideable and dangerous. Would that qualify as loss of use for insurance purposes?
    2012 goal: learn to ride like a Barn Rat

    A helmet saved my life.



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar. 8, 2004
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    19,708

    Default

    Unless there is an underlying soundness issue causing the behavior I would say no. It covers physical problems not suitability. Loss of use is very hard to collect on under the best of circumstances which is why most people feel it is not worth the expense.



  3. #3
    Join Date
    May. 23, 2006
    Posts
    1,362

    Default

    Agree with Laurierace.

    But check the exact wording of your policy. If you don't already have a policy, then you are definitely out of luck!
    ...somewhere between the talent and the potato....



  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul. 13, 2011
    Location
    East Longmeadow, MA
    Posts
    3,275

    Default

    just my 2 cents as a lawyer for an insurance company - I would say definitely not. The policy's purpose is to ensure against illness or accident, so unless the loss of use results from either of those, the policy would not kick in.



  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    40,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheHorseProblem View Post
    Let's say you spend a small fortune for a horse that turned out to be unrideable and dangerous. Would that qualify as loss of use for insurance purposes?
    If the horse was sold with knowledge of those conditions that made it unsuitable, that is what attorneys are for, you regress that wrong thru a lawsuit.

    Insurance contracts specify what loss of use is and generally it means the horse was sick or injured so gravely there was loss of use, or a stallion becomes infertile.

    I don't think that, because you bought a horse for a task and he is not suitable, that falls into a true loss of use as intended for insurance purposes.



  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb. 12, 2010
    Posts
    48

    Default

    I would be careful of trying to claim for loss of use. I do believe it is set up for serious injury and illness for the most part as has already been stated. I have also heard that in some cases the insurance company would not pay loss of use unless the horse was put down (this could be wrong - again, that part is something I have "heard"). I guess the theory is that if the horse has sustained a serious enough injury or illness for "loss of use" then it would be at the stage of putting down anyway? I would think the stallion's infertility would be the only exception to that line of thought.

    Again, I could be completely off the mark. Please someone else let me know if I am over-exaggerating - I don't mind and would like some further clarification myself. But, I think insurance companies would be very hesitant to pay out any $$$ for "loss of use" for a horse that *might* be "used" for another purpose in the future when it concerns riding/work use.



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2007
    Posts
    15,134

    Default

    "Loss of use" has a very narrow definition for insurance companies. 3'6" AO horse gets hurt and can't do that but still can jump 2'6"? That ain't "loss of use" because Wrecked Horse can technically still jump/be ridden. At least that's how I understand it.

    Also, once you collect on the claim, the horse belongs to the insurance co. They can do whatever they like with the animal.
    The armchair saddler
    Politically Pro-Cat



  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb. 12, 2010
    Posts
    48

    Default a little clearer?

    Quote Originally Posted by mvp View Post
    "Loss of use" has a very narrow definition for insurance companies. 3'6" AO horse gets hurt and can't do that but still can jump 2'6"? That ain't "loss of use" because Wrecked Horse can technically still jump/be ridden. At least that's how I understand it.

    Also, once you collect on the claim, the horse belongs to the insurance co. They can do whatever they like with the animal.
    Ahhh, this may be where I was getting the "put the horse down" information. My guess here is if the insurance pays out the claim and now owns the horse that has lost its use - the insurance company may/could determine that the horse needs to be put down as they could not recoup any $$ for the horse.



  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun. 20, 2008
    Posts
    3,805

    Default

    Depends on what your loss of use policy is and often there are 1 or 2 options. One options is that the insurance pays you a certain % and they have the option to take the horse (which is probably rare) or they pay out a certain % and you keep the horse. But you cannot claim loss of use because horse is a wacko..



  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    40,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by horseworld View Post
    Ahhh, this may be where I was getting the "put the horse down" information. My guess here is if the insurance pays out the claim and now owns the horse that has lost its use - the insurance company may/could determine that the horse needs to be put down as they could not recoup any $$ for the horse.
    Or sell the horse for another use it is still fit for, to remedy some of the losses, like a broodmare, trail riding horse, etc.

    I don't think you can insure that your stake winning horse you insured for big money and loss of use and, if it now doesn't run well at al for you, you can get "loss of use, because he is not a stakes horse any more".

    If he gets hurt and can't run any more, then you may qualify that as "loss of use", if that is in the contract.



  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2007
    Posts
    15,134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by horseworld View Post
    Ahhh, this may be where I was getting the "put the horse down" information. My guess here is if the insurance pays out the claim and now owns the horse that has lost its use - the insurance company may/could determine that the horse needs to be put down as they could not recoup any $$ for the horse.
    I'm not privy to this, but I watched an competitive ammy who was married to a lameness guru of a DVM in NorCal in the 1980s do this. They were rumored to have collected on loss of use claims, buy the horse back for percentage and then lameness guru kept the horses going because he was the only guy who could.

    Insurance co.s don't want to own horses, so I assume they sell the horse ASAP-- auction or whathaveyou.
    The armchair saddler
    Politically Pro-Cat



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar. 8, 2004
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    19,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    Or sell the horse for another use it is still fit for, to remedy some of the losses, like a broodmare, trail riding horse, etc.

    I don't think you can insure that your stake winning horse you insured for big money and loss of use and, if it now doesn't run well at al for you, you can get "loss of use, because he is not a stakes horse any more".

    If he gets hurt and can't run any more, then you may qualify that as "loss of use", if that is in the contract.
    You can't get major medical on race horses let alone loss of use. As soon as a tb goes to be broke the major medical is cancelled.



  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    40,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laurierace View Post
    You can't get major medical on race horses let alone loss of use. As soon as a tb goes to be broke the major medical is cancelled.
    That was an example only.
    We quit running long ago, didn't know that is where the industry is now.
    When we were running, you could buy at a sale and have the colt insured before it walked back in the sale barn stall.
    Guess too many losses made insuring running horses a losing proposition?



  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar. 8, 2004
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    19,708

    Default

    You can still get drop of the hammer coverage but it is for mortality only.



  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul. 24, 2008
    Posts
    3,012

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laurierace View Post
    You can still get drop of the hammer coverage but it is for mortality only.
    What does that mean?



  16. #16
    Join Date
    May. 6, 2009
    Location
    The Left Coast
    Posts
    3,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laurierace View Post
    Unless there is an underlying soundness issue causing the behavior I would say no. It covers physical problems not suitability. Loss of use is very hard to collect on under the best of circumstances which is why most people feel it is not worth the expense.

    But seriously, that's a shame, because people spend big money on unstarted young prospects with great breeding (and I'm not talking about race horses) but if the horse has a mental illness (i.e. a screw loose causing dangerous behavior) the owner is SOL with a six-figure lawn pasture puff.

    I guess that would be difficult to prove and easy to create in a horse, i.e. if the horse were mishandled enough to turn it into a bolter, that would be a less heinous fraud than electrocution the disappointing GP horse.
    Last edited by TheHorseProblem; Jul. 19, 2011 at 05:35 PM. Reason: duh
    2012 goal: learn to ride like a Barn Rat

    A helmet saved my life.



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 47
    Last Post: Aug. 11, 2012, 12:25 PM
  2. Spinoff from the oxy thread
    By Curb Appeal in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Jul. 3, 2011, 12:48 AM
  3. Spinoff Dementia/AD thread...
    By CDE Driver in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Jan. 16, 2011, 07:52 PM
  4. Spinoff of college thread?
    By Equitation62012 in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Feb. 24, 2010, 05:08 PM
  5. Hair Loss and Loss of Skin Pigmentation?
    By Void in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Sep. 29, 2009, 11:04 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness