The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 93
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan. 15, 2008
    Location
    Marin, California
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coanteen View Post
    Honestly, if I was trainer and the horse was really valuable, I'd pay off the damned BO and file the necessary paperwork to get started on selling the horse.
    The problem will be serving the horse's owners - she'll probably need to hire a lawyer to advise since they're not in the US, not to mention someone to translate the legalese. Can that horse bring in what she's owed, what the BO's owed, and all the legal fees likely to be associated with an international civil case? While I'm not 100% sure about CA, usually the lien holder isn't even allowed to make any profit - strictly what they're owed, plus maybe their legal fees depending on what the statute says.
    Yes thank you, that is the track the trainer is taking and the horse is definitely worth all that and more.
    "When it comes to horses, there is no such thing as a passing fancy. They're a constant in life." -Jackie Kennedy Onassis



  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2011
    Location
    Coastal Marsh of Texas
    Posts
    1,086

    Default

    I've seen BO's padlock horses in stalls before. It is stressful on onlookers who fear the 'what if's' but it is commonly done, especially in these kinds of situations.

    Something may have happened in the relationship between the 26 yr old and the parents, might be best to stay out of it and let the law run its course. The horse sounds abandoned to me and two professionals need to be paid.



  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jun. 23, 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,670

    Default

    It certainly appears, from the laws copied & posted here, that the owner of the facility has the legal right to lock up the horse, even if it is unwise (even setting aside the inherent cruelty of the decision). Certainly if there were an emergency (fire, illness, etc.) that resulted in the death of the horse, there would be no more valuable asset.

    Not only that, but if the owners of the horse wanted to spirit him away in the night, a set of bolt cutters would do the trick. So the lock keeps out those well meaning souls who want to care for the horse, but will do absolutely nothing to stop someone who wants to leave with it. Based on that, I agree completely with the earlier poster who said that the barn owner was not being very smart.

    I also agree that the trainer's wisest move would be to pay the barn owner their relatively small amount owed, so she could then pursue her own lien, and if necessary, move the horse to another barn, so that the owner would not know where it was.



  4. #44
    Join Date
    Aug. 25, 2007
    Posts
    8,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hinderella View Post
    It certainly appears, from the laws copied & posted here, that the owner of the facility has the legal right to lock up the horse, even if it is unwise (even setting aside the inherent cruelty of the decision). Certainly if there were an emergency (fire, illness, etc.) that resulted in the death of the horse, there would be no more valuable asset.

    Not only that, but if the owners of the horse wanted to spirit him away in the night, a set of bolt cutters would do the trick. So the lock keeps out those well meaning souls who want to care for the horse, but will do absolutely nothing to stop someone who wants to leave with it. Based on that, I agree completely with the earlier poster who said that the barn owner was not being very smart.

    I also agree that the trainer's wisest move would be to pay the barn owner their relatively small amount owed, so she could then pursue her own lien, and if necessary, move the horse to another barn, so that the owner would not know where it was.
    Securing the horse in a locked stall is not "inherently cruel" if there's no loss. The lock may not stop a determined thief, but it will keep honest folks honest.

    In many states there's a BIG difference (like between a fine or a few days in a county jail and several years in prison) between taking property by just walking away with it and using instrumentalities to break locks after sunset. That latter practice can also earn somebody a butt full of buckshot.

    Both trainer and BO claim to have liens. The BO's is proably superior (as "first in time is first in right"), but that would depend on state law. In any event proceeding jointly would be economical and practical.

    If the BO is providing care to the horse IAW the contract then the entire matter it's nobody's business but thiers, and maybe the trainer's. In any event they should talk.

    G.



  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jun. 14, 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    11,372

    Default

    I am not in favor of anyone getting stiffed. But padlocks that only one person can open represent a real safety threat to me.

    No matter how shitty the owner, the horse should have a fighting chance in the case of emergency.

    I am not a fan of padlocks.

    That is really freaking scary.

    I HATE the idea of halters on horses. But my horse wears one 24/7. Why? Because our barn is big, but older and on a busy road. All horses wear halters 24/7 so that in the case of fire they can be easily caught and led out.

    I still hate it on the one hand. But it makes so much sense.

    So if someone was PADLOCKING? OMG. I can't imagine.

    If you need to get out, you need to get out NOW.

    Scary.

    Yes of course, owner should pay. I don't think anyone disputes that. But no matter what someone owes, the life of the animal should not (IMHO) be put at risk.
    A good horseman doesn't have to tell anyone...the horse already knows.

    Might be a reason, never an excuse...



  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jun. 1, 2002
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    11,138

    Default

    I will say again, it depends on the state. In INDIANA, if you call the police, they will release the horse to the owner.

    The police are not around to decide if a contract is valid. If the barn owner violated the contract by not providing a service listed, could he still hold the horse until the owner paid up, or is the contract considered void and the owner may leave?

    That is a matter for the courts to decide and in that case the police will release the horse to the owner and let the matter be settled in court.



  7. #47
    Join Date
    Aug. 25, 2007
    Posts
    8,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by enjoytheride View Post
    I will say again, it depends on the state. In INDIANA, if you call the police, they will release the horse to the owner.

    The police are not around to decide if a contract is valid. If the barn owner violated the contract by not providing a service listed, could he still hold the horse until the owner paid up, or is the contract considered void and the owner may leave?

    That is a matter for the courts to decide and in that case the police will release the horse to the owner and let the matter be settled in court.
    I just reviewed Indiana's lien laws. There are here:

    http://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/lien/in_lien.htm

    The question of possetion is not addressed. But under most lien law procedures the lien holder is entitled to maintain possetion until the lien is discharged. If the lien holder surrenders possetion then the lien is lost.

    Under these rules if an officer were to take possetion of the property under color of law and hand it over to the owner would they not violate the possesory rights of the lien holder? And would not the officer, and his employer, potentially be civilly liable to the lien holder if the debt is ultimately not paid?

    I'm not an Indiana lawyer but it seems to me that if the police, using the power of the state, direct a change of custody they are making a legal judgement on the matter and would be liable if they make a mistake.

    Anybody able the answer the question for sure?

    G.



  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jul. 19, 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    10,405

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Guilherme View Post
    Securing the horse in a locked stall is not "inherently cruel" if there's no loss. The lock may not stop a determined thief, but it will keep honest folks honest.

    In many states there's a BIG difference (like between a fine or a few days in a county jail and several years in prison) between taking property by just walking away with it and using instrumentalities to break locks after sunset. That latter practice can also earn somebody a butt full of buckshot..
    Yes, there's theft, and then there's breaking and entering. In this case depending on the value of the horse it might even be a felony theft without getting bolt cutters (B&E) involved.

    If the BO knows the trainer is owed money and wants the horse they might rightly fear allowing free access means the trainers going to load it up and take off with it, and then they have the lien against the owner (who, as said, is 26--unless the parents signed the contract, they're beside the point-no matter what the owner says, if s/he signed the contract, s/he is solely responsible for the money) AND would have to get the law involved against the trainer as well. I doubt the boarders who AREN'T deadbeats would appreciate the only other thing I could think of which is reasonable, which is putting locked gates at all points where a trucker and trailer or lead horse can enter or exit the property to prevent someone from coming in and removing the horse.

    If the trainer really wants the horse, she should get a lawyer and see if she can pay the back board and take possession legally and then sell the horse however the law permits. Otherwise she should just pull the blankets and stop fussing with it until the lien's resolved. The BO filed first and their lien has precedence, so whether or not the horse loses value to the trainer isn't the BO's problem. She shouldn't have tolerated the deadbeat client for so long. ($12,000?!?)



  9. #49
    Join Date
    May. 21, 2011
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BuddyRoo View Post
    Yes of course, owner should pay. I don't think anyone disputes that. But no matter what someone owes, the life of the animal should not (IMHO) be put at risk.
    What you think matters not when it conflicts with what the lienholder can legally do.

    The last time I checked, this country is still ruled by law, not by emotion or opinion.



  10. #50
    Join Date
    May. 21, 2011
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BuddyRoo View Post
    If you need to get out, you need to get out NOW.
    The horse is no one but the barn owner's to control. If the deadbeat horse owner tried taking it they might get:

    a) arrested
    b) beaten up
    c) worse



  11. #51
    Join Date
    Feb. 6, 2003
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    14,727

    Default

    ... _. ._ .._. .._



  12. #52
    Join Date
    Jun. 1, 2002
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    11,138

    Default

    In the instance I mentioned the owner of the horse was refusing to give 30 days notice or pay 30 days of board as her contract specified because, in her opinion, the Barn Owner had invalidated the contract by failing to fulfill their end. Because the police could not determine who was in the wrong (and if a lien was valid) they released the horse to its owner.



    If it matters to anyone this particular barn lost 20 boarders in under 60 days.



  13. #53
    Join Date
    Jan. 30, 2010
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    3,605

    Default

    Curious about the idea of Trainer paying of the board. Wouldn't that just release the lien the BO has, making the Trainers lien the primary? I don't see how this would transfer the actual ownership of the horse.

    Can trainers put the same sort of lien on a horse that the barn owner can? I didn't think they could which is why most require payment up front for training. (I am assuming that much of that bill is commission). I don't think the trainer could lock the horse up/prevent it from leaving in the same way the BO could...could they?

    It would seem complicated to me as the trainer would then have to be responsible for bills to keep the BO from locking the horse up again, but the BO would have a contract with the owner, not with the trainer. Just seems complicated and something that the BO should discuss with a lawyer.



  14. #54
    Join Date
    Jul. 19, 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    10,405

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CHT View Post
    Curious about the idea of Trainer paying of the board. Wouldn't that just release the lien the BO has, making the Trainers lien the primary? I don't see how this would transfer the actual ownership of the horse.
    This is why I said the TRAINER needs a lawyer. It sounds like the BO has one and is doing what they have to do. The trainer really doesn't have a right to access the horse--it's not theirs, they're not being paid by the owner and any claim they might have on the horse is secondary. If they want the horse, they need to get a lawyer and see if there are any options other than waiting until the BO's lien is processed and buying the horse at public auction. If it's legal, it seems as though allowing the trainer to pay the back board and take ownership would make the most sense, but that might not be possible--but it's entirely the trainer's lookout to get a lawyer. The BO is doing nothing wrong--the horse belongs to the 26-year-old who has failed to pay board, the BO filed a lien and is making sure the horse isn't removed from the property until the lien's settled.



  15. #55
    Join Date
    Sep. 27, 2010
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Sounds silly to endagner the animal that you have a lein on...just saying.



  16. #56
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2002
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,633

    Default

    No more silly than allowing the lienor to slip in and remove the only security they have to recover their money.
    "Absent a correct diagnosis, medicine is poison, surgery is trauma and alternative therapy is witchcraft" A. Kent Allen
    http://www.etsy.com/shop/tailsofglory



  17. #57
    Join Date
    Aug. 25, 2007
    Posts
    8,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HGem View Post
    Sounds silly to endagner the animal that you have a lein on...just saying.
    It seems to me the owner endangered the animal more by not paying the board than the BO did by locking it up...just saying.

    Also, value is not the only thing that moves an entry into a felony. Sometimes if you enter at night or use force (i.e., bolt cutters, rock, etc.) to gain entry you move from Criminal Tresspass (usually a misdemeanor) to Burglary (always a felony).

    This is highly dependant on local law.

    G.



  18. #58
    Join Date
    May. 21, 2008
    Location
    Sonoma County, California
    Posts
    2,510

    Default

    In California, there is a process for a boarding stable to go through to place a lien on the horse for unpaid board. After they have gone through this process (filing paperwork, notices to owner, wait period, etc) they can legally own the horse and/or sell it for back board.

    If the horse is located in Marin, you should call Marin Humane and talk to them about how all this works, and also the locked door aspect. MHS is the Animal Control for Marin County. All public boarding facilities in Marin are inspected by Marin Humane as part of their boarding permit.

    If the horse is in Sonoma County AC, PM me and I'll get you a good contact at AC to answer your questions.



  19. #59
    Join Date
    Jan. 15, 2008
    Location
    Marin, California
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by danceronice View Post
    This is why I said the TRAINER needs a lawyer.
    Please read what I've written before responding. The trainer HAS a LAWYER. She HAS a LIEN. Her lien is secondary but it's still there and she's taking every correct legal step. The problem is not with the horse owner anymore but the trainer-BO relationship where the BO is refusing to team up with trainer who is in same boat, but worse. She's owed even more money. Instead, BO will not allow her assess to horse, any control of lock, etc. It's ridiculous and not helpful when they should be a united force teaming up together against the horse owner. The BO should not be trying to exert power over the trainer. Her issues are not with the trainer. Also, if trainer pays off BO, BO is arguing that she cannot release the horse to trainer but must release possession back to owner who is MIA and is completely unaccessible or responsive to either trainer or BO.
    "When it comes to horses, there is no such thing as a passing fancy. They're a constant in life." -Jackie Kennedy Onassis



  20. #60
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2008
    Posts
    1,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexisgeo View Post
    Please read what I've written before responding. The trainer HAS a LAWYER. She HAS a LIEN. Her lien is secondary but it's still there and she's taking every correct legal step. The problem is not with the horse owner anymore but the trainer-BO relationship where the BO is refusing to team up with trainer who is in same boat, but worse. She's owed even more money. Instead, BO will not allow her assess to horse, any control of lock, etc. It's ridiculous and not helpful when they should be a united force teaming up together against the horse owner. The BO should not be trying to exert power over the trainer. Her issues are not with the trainer. Also, if trainer pays off BO, BO is arguing that she cannot release the horse to trainer but must release possession back to owner who is MIA and is completely unaccessible or responsive to either trainer or BO.
    Most of that is correct. In most cases, if the bill is paid, the horse reverts to the owner, no matter who paid it (in this case the trainer), until it goes to public auction. She can't just sell the horse to the trainer.
    "Sadly, some people's greatest skill, is being an idiot". (facebook profile pic I saw).



Similar Threads

  1. Banging on stall door....
    By Here'sYourOneChanceFancy in forum Off Course
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: Aug. 20, 2012, 06:03 PM
  2. Sliding stall door latch
    By horserdrs in forum Around The Farm
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Nov. 24, 2010, 01:35 PM
  3. Mesh stall door ideas
    By horserdrs in forum Around The Farm
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: Oct. 27, 2010, 09:08 PM
  4. Where do I get a name plate for stall door?
    By Mamy in forum Off Course
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Jun. 4, 2009, 02:26 PM
  5. Stall Door Recommendation
    By snickerdoodle in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: Oct. 17, 2008, 09:11 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