The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 184 of 224 FirstFirst ... 84134174182183184185186194 ... LastLast
Results 3,661 to 3,680 of 4466
  1. #3661
    Join Date
    Apr. 28, 2009
    Location
    Alberta's bread basket
    Posts
    1,564

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Molly99 View Post
    This!!!!

    By a quick count the auction bids are over 10k for THREE horses that were seized due to body score! Plus whatever was donated directly! That is an amazing response.

    I just hope hope many of you have also donated towards the MANY other horses that have been seized from much worse situations! Think what that amount of money could do for those 30+ horses.

    I know where I have chosen to send my money!
    Quote Originally Posted by Equine Reproduction View Post
    Just so that everyone is aware, we have been advised by the Marin Humane Society that their expenses with regards to this seizure already exceed the bids placed on the auction to date.
    Quote Originally Posted by starboard View Post
    Wow, they've surpassed 10K for two mares? Ronda's on the financial hook for the stallion more than likely. That's a hell of a lot of money spent in a week.
    Quote Originally Posted by vineyridge View Post
    Don't forget lawyers to defend against the petition for mandamus and otherwise work the seizures. There is also an Administrative Law Judge involved and they don't come free.
    Seizing horses is very expensive - there are lawyer's fees, court fees, investigator fees, not to mention boarding fees and other horse care costs, veterinary costs/fees for the mares that are being treated. Nobody except a close few know just how serious that mares' condition is. This is expensive stuff. All this stuff can EASILY surpass 10K in mere days.
    Last edited by rodawn; Jan. 13, 2013 at 11:23 PM.
    http://www.mariposasporthorses.com/

    Practice! Patience! Persistence!


    2 members found this post helpful.

  2. #3662
    Join Date
    Apr. 28, 2009
    Location
    Alberta's bread basket
    Posts
    1,564

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BaroquePony View Post
    It was my understanding that the stallion with the broken jaw was seized by AC, so AC is most likely going to have to pay the broken jaw bill and then wait until this plays out in court.
    Quote Originally Posted by currycomb321 View Post
    I have to agree - why is the MCHS giving information to an uninvolved party? Being a donor doesn't entitle you to private financial information. If that is public knowledge, I'd like to see the breakdown of costs because - since RS belongs to RSF and they are paying the bills - how the heck could this seizure have cost over 10k? In a few days? No way.
    Okay, but since Rising Star Farm had not yet had the stallion DELIVERED to them, he is still technically under the care of Jill Burnell. I don't know about you, but until my newly purchased horse is picked up by the transporter, that horse still is under the protection and care of the seller. Therefore, if you purchased a horse from someone and the horse gets seizured before your transporter picks it up, you are not yet on the hook for any of that horse's expenses. These are still the responsibility of the seller.

    I would think this would be part of the rather expensive legal work undertaken by MCHS to retrieve the sales monies from the sale of the stallion to cover reimbursement for the significant expenses in the veterinary care and management of this stallion. While Rising Star Farm might be contributing some money, nobody on this board has any inside knowledge as to what has already been arranged.

    Really, the speculation needs to come down a bit. We don't know and please let's wait for legitimate news from those that know.

    Until the legal wranglings are dealt with, real and proper information must needs be kept away from the public. The rest is all speculation.
    Last edited by rodawn; Jan. 14, 2013 at 12:17 AM.
    http://www.mariposasporthorses.com/

    Practice! Patience! Persistence!


    2 members found this post helpful.

  3. #3663
    Join Date
    Feb. 11, 2003
    Location
    Lincoln, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,486

    Default

    Okay, but since Rising Star Farm had not yet had the stallion DELIVERED to them, he is still technically under the care of Jill Burnell. I don't know about you, but until my newly purchased horse is picked up by the transporter, that horse still is under the protection and care of the seller. Therefore, if you purchased a horse from someone and the horse gets seizured before your transporter picks it up, you are not yet on the hook for any of that horse's expenses. These are still the responsibility of the seller.
    No , not really, unless that is the specific agreement between the 2 parties. When a horse is purchased the new owner becomes responsible for its expenses, regardless where the horse resides. If however, like it appears in this case, the caretaker is liable for maltreatment and caused the reason for the HS seizure that makes it different. For practical purposes that is not going to matter much, Jill is not likely to be reimbursing anybody soon for damage caused. Or maybe RS can have a piece of Petaluma property that does not perk
    www.immunallusa.com
    www.rainbowequus.com Home of stallions that actually produced champion hunter, jumper and dressage offspring and now also champion eventers


    5 members found this post helpful.

  4. #3664
    Join Date
    Mar. 12, 2006
    Posts
    4,343

    Default

    But, let's look at this a little bit further. By purchasing Romantic Star, she has essentially put funds into the "wonderful" JB/GFF's coffers and thereby assists the woman in continuing on her way of shouldering people out of money, foals, mares, breedings, etc. Yeah...Ronda is a "wonderful" person, isn't she. AMAZING! Worthy of all your glowing remarks. More like self-serving, self-agrandizing, conceited, self-absorbed and certainly villainous in this situation. She's lost ALL credibility in my eyes and I will question anyone that sees her as a hero in this. Who is she helping here? Really? The horses? The humane society? Jill Burnell? Ronda Stavisky? Who? Shame on her and anyone else attempting to sweep any of this under the rug for the sake of keeping Jill the star of this disgusting mess. She's as much a problem here as Jill.
    Above all, breeding is a BUSINESS. A business in which one hopes to make a profit, I suppose more likely minimize a loss. It sounds like she had a good opportunity to purchase a quality horse in a bad situation. For me, it's a good business transaction.

    I work in real estate.... money changes hands a lot of times, and sometimes, it's someone we don't like making a profit off a land sale. We don't go get all angry at the people making the transactions- we look at the future value of the land and get on with it.

    Heck, I am considering buying my neighbor's home... it's an urgent sale, good price. He is basically considered a pedophile that hasn't been caught and got run down to FL. He'll make a small profit, I'll make a bigger profit. Yup, he is a class A sleazeball. Yup, we could let the house get foreclosed on and auctioned so he could be "punished". But then no one wins.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  5. #3665
    Join Date
    Feb. 13, 2007
    Location
    Down on the Farm
    Posts
    3,054

    Default

    I'm not trying to speculate, so I'll try not to. If I was in the position of the reputable breeder, doing business with a not so reputable breeder at this point and was considering purchasing this stallion (or any other), the check would only be sent, money wired, etc. IF the horse arrived in decent condition. Of course this would be AFTER vet checks and PROOF of vaccines, health certificate and an any exams requested.

    Given the history of this particuliar situation, one would be deemed foolish to do it any other way, so it just makes me wonder if there was actually any funds transferred at this point. I would assume somewhere there is a contract that would state this. So, I agree that JB would be responsible for all vet bills and any fees that it will take to get this horse released to the "prospective" buyer, that is the only reason I can deduce that the new prospective buyer might want to go through JB's attorney.

    I see nothing wrong with wanting to buy a stallion from a not so reputable breeder, good for the horse, good for the industry, but the words "Buyer Beware" have never meant so much.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  6. #3666
    Join Date
    Dec. 27, 2006
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Assuming that RSF is the only farm that is purchasing a horse from GFF at this time is naive. If you look at her sale page, she has a bunch of nice youngsters. I wonder how many of them are still available. If she is offering a "fire sale", that is the only way some people will ever be able to afford a horse of that caliber. To others, a deal too good to pass up. If the state has not frozen her assets, is she not free to do business as usual? Isn't getting the horses out of a BAD situation the first priority here? I understand the frustration of those that have been duped by "her", and are left hanging in the wind. Having her answer for her crimes will happen in time and I hope she has to answer for each and every one of them.

    In the meantime, bid or donate to help support the animals that need it!


    8 members found this post helpful.

  7. #3667
    Join Date
    Dec. 19, 2005
    Location
    Some where in the middle of nowhere.
    Posts
    3,553

    Default

    I think there have been plenty of other Breeding programs that have not succeeded and animals have been sold/purchased enveloped into other's programs that is NOT a problem or an issue.

    The delineation is between are you picking up animals from a program that is closing or has failed , helping the owners and animals find closure, or are you handing money over to there for enabling a active program to continue that in all justice should not .

    She bred nice horses its just a shame she could not also facilitate equally good business and husbandry practices.
    "I would not beleive her if her tongue came notorized"


    1 members found this post helpful.

  8. #3668
    Join Date
    Sep. 2, 2005
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    11,672

    Default

    Note, I make no implication that the below are facts associated with any of the people involved in this situation. This is just my opinion on some of the ramblings contained here.


    I am confused why some people can not see that more than one thing can be happening here. Why is it impossible to surmise that yes JB is hiding horses (like the mare referenced here way back) by saying they some horses sold (but they are really hiding somewhere) and she made a fully legal sale of one of her stallions too?
    JB is smart. Selling a stallion is a good way to make money. It is not like she is leaving herself with no stallions if she sells the one (RS).
    I can totally get why a good breeder would want a good stallion, even more so if they are not only getting him for a very reasonable price but a bonus of getting him out of a bad situation. It does not mean the good breeder is now bad because they are buying a good stallion previously owned by a bad breeder.
    I would assume that a good breeder would know (assume) that buying a horse out of a bad place means he is going to show up needing some TLC before he is 100% to their standards. That does not mean it is not a good purchase.

    People buy horses sight unseen all the time. Why is a stallion owner now required to do a hands on visual inspection to be a reputable buyer? This is not an unknown creature. It is a stallion with a history.

    A health certificate for transport does not equal papers stating a horse is in good flesh ready to walk into the show ring. It just means the horse is lacking in communicable diseases that would restrict the horse's ability to cross state lines.
    How many threads have we had here where people transport skinny rescues? How many thread have we had here where people buy a horse and it shows up in a condition far worse than they thought it would be? Those horses got a health certificate too. The vet is not saying it is healthy, just that it is not going to infest everyone on the trailer with something contagious and take that issue to another state.
    Just because JB's lawyer is using the vet coming out doing a health certificate as an example of how all the horses are healthy does not mean that is what that paper work proves. It is just her representing her client and/or being clueless about what a health certificate is.



    Quote Originally Posted by FalseImpression View Post
    From your response, it does not seem they are appreciative of the help though... Are they assuming the auction would cover all the expenses? Sorry, maybe it's the way you presented it, but it does not sit very well with me. I did donate directly to them FYI.
    I read her post to more say that please do not stop bidding and donating just because you think the number that has been collected so far is high. They still need more money because this is going to get expensive.
    I do not see anywhere in what was posted that MHS was not appreciating anything.


    10 members found this post helpful.

  9. #3669
    Join Date
    Feb. 8, 2008
    Location
    Delaware Valley
    Posts
    1,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by magnolia73 View Post
    I work in real estate.... money changes hands a lot of times, and sometimes, it's someone we don't like making a profit off a land sale. We don't go get all angry at the people making the transactions- we look at the future value of the land and get on with it.
    I try to say little on this thread. But, as I mentioned earlier, I used to prosecute white collar crime, and that included some cases tangentially involving real estate. I would have been very suspicious of the exchange of property while a case was under investigation. There is such a thing as acting in good faith - or not. Disposing of (or hiding) property that might be available for restitution is not considered kosher. Just so you know I'm not accusing the purchaser of doing anything illegal but - no - I wouldn't buy a horse from someone who is being investigated for ripping off people.


    13 members found this post helpful.

  10. #3670
    Join Date
    May. 17, 2000
    Location
    Where am I and what am I doing in this handbasket?
    Posts
    23,381

    Default

    Assuming that RSF is the only farm that is purchasing a horse from GFF at this time is naive. If you look at her sale page, she has a bunch of nice youngsters. I wonder how many of them are still available. If she is offering a "fire sale", that is the only way some people will ever be able to afford a horse of that caliber. To others, a deal too good to pass up. If the state has not frozen her assets, is she not free to do business as usual? Isn't getting the horses out of a BAD situation the first priority here? I understand the frustration of those that have been duped by "her", and are left hanging in the wind. Having her answer for her crimes will happen in time and I hope she has to answer for each and every one of them.
    ^ This with a nod to Long Spot's squirrel nutcake.

    Sometimes it's worth taking a long hard look at how the real world works. And in the real world it is unlikely that MHS will seize all the horses and if by some chance they did, they would be in a world of hurt, financially. I'm sorry, but dollars to donuts, the horses that were seized - especially if it was only 4 out of potentially 30+ - are most likely injured and/or old. JB neither has the money or facilities to treat them or provide food/management that an elderly broodmare/stallion might need. I doubt this is a shock to anyone. But clearly she doesn't have a dry lot full of walking skeletons since they are still in her possession after multiple visits and a high degree of attention.

    There's probably a couple options here:

    1. she maintains a number of horses (presumably less than today) and effects improvement of her facilities (or some other property) that meets the county requirements. And she probably stays on the county radar for some time, should she manage this.

    2. She actively reduces the entire herd.

    3. She doesn't do the above in X time frame and MHS seizes all the horses, sells them ... eventually and any money in excess of what they are owed for care and management is returned to Jill.

    As much as it clearly pains some people to realize that JB might get money for some of these horses, you need to put on your big boy pants and realize that is just how the game will play out if we consider what is absolutely the best possible outcome for the horses. And MHS' ability to serve abused, starved and neglected animals in their market who are potentially in far more dire circumstances, to be honest.

    In the real wold, if she actively reduces her herd now, that money has a higher probability of going to those who have a judgment against her or directly to the horses as this whole process is under a regulatory microscope. If the horses are seized at some later point, it's because their lives will be going considerably further downhill than they are now. Gee, who would vote for that option?

    However, any way you cut it JB's life in the world of breeding WBs for the hunter market is effectively over - the word isout, the house of cards is crumbling - she didn't end up in the place she is because her business model was effective! So whether you want JB out of the business because of an excess of Internet Schaudenfraude or a genuine concern that her business practices cast a poor light over the entire breeding community, consider the war won. It's just some minor skirmishes left to play out. Although a good chunk of the breeders (and their mini-minions and alters) posting on here wouldn't know smart business PR if it bit them in the face as evidenced by the ongoing freak show they present to the world.

    At the end of the day the horses will move on to new owners, either from old owners claiming their retired mares or the sale of that 2013 crop and sale of the mares/stallions/remaining young stock. The fact that some of these horses are already being sold should bother exactly NO SANE PERSON (unless they had another agenda). Because all that means is those horses are moving on to a better place. The MHS doesn't want to rehab a bunch of starved horses 6 months down the road just for giggles, they want those horses to stay healthy and get a good home and they would probably prefer their limited funds be put to more catastrophic abuse/starvation cases and JB's creditors do not want black blingy ponies, they want CASH.

    Selling horses and reducing that herd makes sense to absolutely everyone who has sat back and watched this freak show unfold (both the JB and internet side). Big ol' congrats to those that have entertained the onlookers over the weekend. Let your freak flag fly, I say!
    Definition of "Horse": a 4 legged mammal looking for an inconvenient place and expensive way to die. Any day they choose not to execute the Master Plan is just more time to perfect it. Be Very Afraid.


    23 members found this post helpful.

  11. #3671
    Join Date
    Feb. 13, 2007
    Location
    Down on the Farm
    Posts
    3,054

    Default

    I agree trubandloki, I sold a horse to a buyer sight unseen. I protected myself, and she protected herself. There was a full set of xrays taken by my vet and sent to her, there were numerous videos and pictures with time stamps sent, of course there was a HC and vet records. A good friend of hers was the shipper, buyer and I had paper drawn up that would state what kind of condition the horse left my farm in, as well as a picture with the shipper holding the horse.

    While I'm not sure how much good these things would have stood up in court if there were a problem, we both felt like we covered our bases as best we could. Full legal contract approved by my attorney, etc.

    I think as I already stated in my last post, that if it is known that an owner may be a risk, you would do due diligence to make sure you are getting what you pay for.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  12. #3672
    Join Date
    Oct. 26, 2007
    Location
    San Jose, Ca
    Posts
    4,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rodawn View Post
    Okay, but since Rising Star Farm had not yet had the stallion DELIVERED to them, he is still technically under the care of Jill Burnell. I don't know about you, but until my newly purchased horse is picked up by the transporter, that horse still is under the protection and care of the seller. Therefore, if you purchased a horse from someone and the horse gets seizured before your transporter picks it up, you are not yet on the hook for any of that horse's expenses. These are still the responsibility of the seller
    This is not the case in my experience. Once you purchase a horse, it is now your responsibility. I have purchased insurance to cover a horse remaining in sellers care (weanling I had to wait for) as I would be responsible for it as soon as the contract was signed and money exchanged hands.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  13. #3673
    Join Date
    Mar. 8, 2004
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    19,592

    Default

    I know someone who bought a horse at a sale, it walked out of the ring where they took the bids, flipped over and fractured it's skull. They now owned a dead horse.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  14. #3674
    Join Date
    Mar. 24, 2012
    Posts
    1,562

    Default

    Therefore, if you purchased a horse from someone and the horse gets seizured before your transporter picks it up, you are not yet on the hook for any of that horse's expenses. These are still the responsibility of the seller.
    No. Not necessarilly. It depends on the terms of the agreement and when ownership changed.

    I sure hope no one is taking legal advice from this thread.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  15. #3675
    Join Date
    Sep. 2, 2005
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    11,672

    Default

    Therefore, if you purchased a horse from someone and the horse gets seizured before your transporter picks it up, you are not yet on the hook for any of that horse's expenses. These are still the responsibility of the seller.
    I have to agree with the others, it depends on what your contract says.

    I would guess that the person who purchased is responsible as it is their horse. They could maybe then go after the barn owner for not providing adequate care.



  16. #3676
    Join Date
    Aug. 21, 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    157

    Default

    CAN WE PLEASE GET THIS THREAD BACK ON TOPIC!


    3 members found this post helpful.

  17. #3677
    Join Date
    Feb. 13, 2007
    Location
    Down on the Farm
    Posts
    3,054

    Default

    I'll throw one more tidbit out there and be done. I find it hard to fathom that the LEAGAL owner (that is if they can prove it) of RS cannot find out any information on the horse. If I had purchased him I'd be like white on rice, probably getting on a plane with papers in hand and show up at the clinic.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  18. #3678
    Join Date
    Aug. 2, 2001
    Location
    Ft Worth, TX, USA
    Posts
    3,862

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laurierace View Post
    I know someone who bought a horse at a sale, it walked out of the ring where they took the bids, flipped over and fractured it's skull. They now owned a dead horse.
    Yep, plenty of claimed horses never made back to the barn for their new owner. Rules are changing in some jurisdictions, but generally speaking if money has changed hands, or paper work has been signed, the new owner is responsible for expenses.
    "Everyone will start to cheer, when you put on your sailin shoes"-Lowell George

    What's the status on Tuco?



  19. #3679
    Join Date
    Oct. 23, 2004
    Location
    Sisters, Oregon
    Posts
    1,890

    Default

    RE: this statement...
    "3. She doesn't do the above in X time frame and MHS seizes all the horses, sells them ... eventually and any money in excess of what they are owed for care and management is returned to Jill.
    "


    Pertaining to the people that have judgements against her for money owed would the "excess" not be used to pay those judgements?

    I have no idea how that all works but was just curious.
    Kanoe Godby
    www.dyrkgodby.com
    See, I was raised by wolves and am really behind the 8-ball on diplomatic issue resolution.



  20. #3680
    Join Date
    Sep. 2, 2005
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    11,672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Acertainsmile View Post
    I'll throw one more tidbit out there and be done. I find it hard to fathom that the LEAGAL owner (that is if they can prove it) of RS cannot find out any information on the horse. If I had purchased him I'd be like white on rice, probably getting on a plane with papers in hand and show up at the clinic.
    Darn her for not being able to schedule her life in a manner that you seem to think shows she is doing the right thing.
    She has hired a lawyer who I assume is in CA to handle it. To me that would make far much more sense than jumping on a plain and making a scene at MHS.


    5 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Jill Burnell Gray Fox Farms - FACTS THREAD
    By ldaziens in forum Sport Horse Breeding
    Replies: 231
    Last Post: Jun. 10, 2014, 02:54 PM
  2. Replies: 18
    Last Post: Jan. 20, 2013, 11:41 AM
  3. Marketing/Business Plans for the Equine related business?
    By two sticks in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Jun. 13, 2012, 04:44 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Jun. 12, 2012, 06:03 PM
  5. They bred Jill??????????
    By equinedriver in forum Eventing
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: Aug. 24, 2011, 11:31 PM

Posting Permissions

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