Generally, trainers are providing a service, training and caring for the owner's horse.
Unless there are other arrangements, owner always pays the trainer for any and all services and expenses incurred during those services.
I agree that the owner pays for the show expenses. I'm a little less certain about the trainer riding in a lesson with a bigger NT. Yes the horse is being trained but so is the trainer. Maybe split 50-50?
I wasn't always a Smurf
Penmerryl's Sophie RIDSH
"I ain't as good as I once was but I'm as good once as I ever was"
The ignore list is my friend. It takes 2 to argue.
I agree that the owner pays for show fees unless otherwise discussed. For example if the trainer really wants/needs a horse to take to a particular show, and the owner could care less, then the trainer may offer to pay for part or all of the fees.
As for the lesson/clinic, I think it would be fair for the owner and trainer to discuss the fees. If it is the owner who wants the horse to go to the BNT, then the owner should pay. IF the trainer needs a horse to ride in a lesson and asked to take the horse, then the trainer may pay, or it could work out as a split. If the trainer regularly lessons with the BNT, then it is possible that the lesson(s) are already worked in to the training rate.
While the owner paying may be customary, the situation is actually fully negotiable. Each trainer-owner pair needs to discuss this and determine what works best for their particular situation. Ideally, this is all documented in a training contract between the trainer and the owner. I have seen all sorts of variations on this, including one where the trainer pays all the show fees but also gets to keep any monies won, the owner getting only the ribbons. Not a common arrangement, but one that works for this pair.
"Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit."
- Desiderata, (c) Max Ehrman, 1926
Owner. Owner should pay for entries as well as all other expenses bringing a horse to a show incurs- shipping the horse, travel expenses for the trainer if they are not the one doing the shipping, hotel for the trainer, etc. Owner should also pay for the lesson, especially since they were auditing it.
This would assume the trainer is of sufficient ability to be charging for providing a service and not a learner level trainer. I always actually paid all show expenses PLUS a fee for the trainer riding in a class.
The lesson? Again assuming this is not a learner level trainer and the clinician is a big name? And owner will audit? Owner should be glad to pay for a Pro being taught by a better Pro and that horse will get 100 times more out of that BNT session then carting owner around.
Whatever, agree to it beforehand, it should be on trainers rate sheet (which they should give to all clients) or get something else in writing to avoid nasty surprises on your bill.
When opportunity knocks it's wearing overalls and looks like work.
Client (owner) has horse in training with trainer. Both go to a show, trainer is riding horse. Who pays for entries, owner or trainer?
Owner pays all.
Originally Posted by ReAlterEd
Trainer takes horse to a lesson with bigger-better trainer. Owner comes along to watch. Who pays for lesson, owner or trainer?
In my opinion, this should be split half half, though it is more often than not that the owners pay all. The reason being that the horse benefits, but the trainer benefits more, as he/she learns how to be a better trainer/rider, which helps with other horses he/she trains and his/her own future career.
Now I believe he/she should have built his/her in-career education expenses in the normal training fee, which should apply to situation like this (meaning, a set amount from training put away for his/her clinic fees), but again, this does not seem to be norm at all.
The owner always pays for show expenses. I suppose if there was a situation where the owner didn't really want to have the horse show but the trainer really wanted to ride the horse in it then the trainer would pay, but in real life I've never seen that happen.
Lessons vary much more and are a lot more open to discussion, but usually the owner pays as well. It does benefit the horse as much as the trainer, and it's pretty customary.
Most trainers I know do set money aside for continuing education, but they use it to go to conventions, audit clinics, buy books and videos, or for clinics/lessons on their own horses if they have them.
Hmmmm.... I'd say owner pays for all of the showing, but the lesson? Is the owner a non-rider? Why isn't the owner riding in the lesson? Why does the trainer want to take that horse to use for a lesson? Is it because she doesn't have a horse of her own to use? Is it to benefit a specific issue that the horse is having? If it's not for that specific horse's benefit than I'd say no, owner doesn't pay for a trainer's riding lessons.
I tend to think of it this way: in my field (IT), continuing education is extremely important, and my company pays for everything (books, training, conventions, hotels, meals, transportaions, etc).
The clients that benefit from my speicific training does NOT pay for my training directly, even though I might use my new skills to provide a service for them directly; rather, the company, which means, all clients pay for it. Why? The training I receive will benefit other clients as well.
If anyone can convince me that a given trainer does not gain any benefit by riding in a clinic, his/her own horse or otherwise, then I'd believe the horse is the sole beneficiary, and then I'd say owner pays all. But we all know that is not true.
For one thing, for the horse to be the sole beneficiary, the trainer has to know everything the clinician has to say already (hence, she does not get any benefit from said clinic), and in this case, there is no reason for the trainer to ride in the clinic at all.
Ah, but Gloria you are not an independent contractor. Most horse trainers are. So I find fault in comparing your employer paying for your training as an employee to doing focused work with the aid of another professional to direclty benefit 1 client's horse.