My trainer (not a BNT) leased me one of her personal mounts for the year. We're headed to show shortly, and I just found out that my trainer will also be showing the mare. I didn't know about that when I signed the lease (lease gives me exclusive use of the mare) but I'm all for it. It's her horse, the mare is young and presumably trainer will want to put her up for sale in the next few years and therefore wants to show her at the higher levels. No biggie.
But then there's the bill... If I weren't leasing the horse, she would have taken her to show anyway. I'm only showing 6 days out of the 3 weeks we will be there. Should I be billed for 100% of all the expenses? Whenever I've shared a lease horse before, both riders pay equally. But is it different simply because she's my trainer's horse? I feel like at the very least the stall fees should be split.
At home, I cover all of the horses expenses- food, board, farrier, vet, chiro, supplements, etc. I suppose my trainer's logic could be that stabling at a show is just like "boarding" and all expenses should still be covered by me, but this just feels a little off to me.
Experiences with similar situations and advice are greatly appreciated!!
If your trainer was showing the horse in warm up classes to prepare her for you then you would pay for the classes but they way you are saying it sounds like she is chosing to show the horse in classes that are not a warm up for you. I believe she should pay for those. If you are only showing for 6 days out of the 3 weeks and your trainer will be showing her many other days over that time it should be split or at least a reduction in fees. At least that's what I would do if I were showing a horse one of my students was showing as long as it's not a warm up for you. Because trainers charge to ride the horse and you pay for the warm ups if it is for you. Good luck and just make sure in the furture you have all of this settled before hand.
You need to have a discussion w/ the trainer ASAP. It sounds like the trainer may have decided that you can pay for her to show her horse in classes to make the horse more sellable, and that's probably not in your lease agreement. This is one of those areas which can get sketchy and you need to nib it in the bud. It's also hard when it comes to stabling - even if you are only showing 6 days of the 3 weeks they are showing - unless they were planning to ship horses back and forth - you are probably going to be stuck for stall expenses, you might also have a discussion about other incidental expenses while your at it - like trainer's meal and hotel expenses - you should contribute a portion of those during the days you show, not the entire time and quite frankly since trainer is planning to show they shouldn't expect the clients to pay for that 100% either (especially when it's a business expense to them). Depending on why trainer is showing the horse - for schooling for you vs benefiting trainer then those expenses should be borne by both of you, not you solely. good luck and let us know how it turns out...
When I did this over the summer and trainer showed the horse over the week and I did the weekend, we split the stall and general fees but paid for our own classes and such separately. Since it's her horse and she's showing it for her own benefit I would assume she pays for all her stuff and you split the stall and such. You pay for braiding on your days and any meds/shoeing/etc that the horse needs for you to show it and she pays for what the horse needs for her to show it. Also if she would be taking the horse without you riding it she definitely should pay for her parts of it.
If the horse is going to be shown all 3 weeks and you don't get to use the horse but only 6 days, it would be appropriate for you to pay for your classes, coaching fees, and to split the stall fees for the days that you are showing. If you aren't allowed to use your (exclusively) leased horse for the rest of the show, you shouldn't be paying for those days. Depending on your lease agreement, of course. Ultimately, differen't trainers have different policies, so you're best bet is to ask.
The other posters have made good points. Also, did you always plan to be there for three weeks? Or has that been a decision made now that the trainer wants to show the horse, too? Are your six days spread out over all three weeks, or are you going to be missing some time in the saddle? I'd say these are things, too, to consider when it comes to expenses.
If she wasn't showing would the horse still be there for 3 weeks? Are the 6 days you are showing the weekends of those 3 weeks. If that is the case I would think you would pay for the stall fees. Whether or not she pays for her own classes depends on if she is doing it as a prep for you or for the horse's show record.
Let's ask this question. Your trainer brings 10 riders and their 10+ horses to the show. Your trainer bills each of you at the end of the show for her time, travel and accommodation fees.
Do you look at this situation and say "If I weren't in training my trainer, she would've been going to the show anyway"? Or "At home "I pay all of my lesson fees at home already and i'm missing those lessons while at a show"?
Typically your trainer showing your horse is beneficial for you, whether it be in a schooling / warmup class or not. If you ask the trainer yourself why this is happening and she proceeds to tell you it is to market the horse, this is a different situation. In this case you would have all the right to kindly ask her to pay for the class fees that will be benefiting the trainer in the end. If this is in your same ring, meaning the ring that you are showing in with this horse, regardless of it being a schooling class or the working hunters, you most likely won't get away with not being able to pay the fee.
This is how I have always seen, done, and understood things. This inspires me to create my own topic that goes hand in hand with this.
Here is what I don't get. If an owner fully leases out their horse - they do not typically have the right to decide to show their horse at a show during the lease term. How is this any different?
I'd be a bit put out that she didn't talk about it with you earlier. Sounds like it wasn't in the lease agreement or you would have mentioned it. Was there a lease agreement? Let's say there isn't - it's still so outside the norm that she should have discussed it with you first.
Let's go a step further and say you are ok with it - then you still need to talk to trainer about who pays what. The collective advice of COTH can only get you so far. In the end, she's the one doing the billing.
As others have said, there's a difference between the trainer showing a young horse to give it a good, confident ride in the ring before the amateur shows in order to make the showing experience a positive one for both you and the horse, and the trainer showing it for her own benefit.
In the first case, you should pay- although you can have a conversation about whether the rides are really necessary if things are going well after the first week or two at the show.
But if it's solely for the trainer's benefit, she should at least pay for the classes, if not split some of the expenses with you. How much she splits would likely depend on the circumstances- would the horse ship home during the week if she's not showing? If not, then you'd be paying for the full stall and day care if she weren't showing, so I wouldn't expect to get too much deducted from those expenses.