Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You're responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the Forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it--details of personal disputes may be better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts, though are not legally obligated to do so, regardless of content.

Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting. Moderators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts unless they have been alerted and have determined that a post, thread or user has violated the Forums' policies. Moderators do not regularly independently monitor the Forums for such violations.

Profanity, outright vulgarity, blatant personal insults or otherwise inappropriate statements will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Users may provide their positive or negative experiences with or opinions of companies, products, individuals, etc.; however, accounts involving allegations of criminal behavior against named individuals or companies MUST be first-hand accounts and may NOT be made anonymously.

If a situation has been reported upon by a reputable news source or addressed by law enforcement or the legal system it is open for discussion, but if an individual wants to make their own claims of criminal behavior against a named party in the course of that discussion, they too must identify themselves by first and last name and the account must be first-person.

Criminal allegations that do not satisfy these requirements, when brought to our attention, may be removed pending satisfaction of these criteria, and we reserve the right to err on the side of caution when making these determinations.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it's understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users' profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses -- Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it's related to a horse for sale, regardless of who's selling it, it doesn't belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions -- Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services -- Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products -- While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements -- Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be "bumped" excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues -- Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators' discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the �alert� button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your �Ignore� list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you'd rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user's membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 5/9/18)
See more
See less

WWYD

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    WWYD

    Deleted because I seem to not be explaining things very well.
    Last edited by twelvebelles; Jun. 1, 2020, 02:29 AM.

    #2
    My friend is upset because it came out of nowhere and she thought it had been a forever home.

    and a 1st right of refusal on any future sale just in case,
    have no idea why your friend is upset... the breeder has done as was agreed upon by offering her the horse back. She apparently refused?

    Not replying in timely manor maybe consider refusal ...consult your attorney

    "First Right of Refusal" and "forever" home are contradictory, at least in my reading of what you wrote

    Comment


      #3
      She said she would have to think about it, and she wanted to talk to the trainer the horse was with before she made a decision. The breeder never responded to her. Some time goes by, and all of a sudden my friend sees a sales ad for the horse with a well known trainer in the area - and it is full of rather significant lies and asking for quite a bit of money.
      Some time = enough time for the first trainer to get her over the hump or send her to a trainer who could do so. The trainer may have corrected the problems. "Right of first refusal" isn't for an indefinite period of time. Your friend didn't respond in a timely manner to either the breeder or the trainer, apparently.

      Comment


        #4
        If you want any of your animals to have a forever home you must provide that yourself. You can't really control what other people do, or what happens in their lives that might require them to pass on a "forever" animal.

        It's rare that someone is *not* lying in a sales ad, especially horses advertised as beginner/children/AA's. I have no idea why this surprises the friend.

        Hopefully the horse finds a good home. There's not much your friend can do except take the horse herself.
        In memory of Apache, who loved to play. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjZAqeg7HyE

        Comment


          #5
          Did she ever talk to the trainer.....

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by twelvebelles View Post
            I am looking for opinions on how to handle a situation a friend is in. She had an expensive young horse that was dangerous to ride and she got hurt. Long story short, my friend ended up selling the horse to back to its breeder with a contract for pennies and a 1st right of refusal on any future sale just in case, although the breeder said she just wanted her a pasture ornament. My friend loved the horse and became friends with the breeder, and they kept in touch. Fast forward three years into this arrangement and the breeder suddenly decides to put the horse into work because she thinks she can be fixed with better training. Of course, almost immediately the same naughty behavior starts again. The breeder contacts my friend and asks if she wants the horse back - per the contract - otherwise she will sell her because it’s not “working out the way she wants.” My friend is upset because it came out of nowhere and she thought it had been a forever home. She said she would have to think about it, and she wanted to talk to the trainer the horse was with before she made a decision. The breeder never responded to her. Some time goes by, and all of a sudden my friend sees a sales ad for the horse with a well known trainer in the area - and it is full of rather significant lies and asking for quite a bit of money. My friend is horrified because a) the breeder never responded to her and so she didn’t actually say she wouldn’t take the horse, so technically the 1st right wasn’t followed and b) the ad is marketing the horse as appropriate for children and AAs!

            What would you all do in this situation? File this under lessons learned, and say nothing and walk away? Contact the sellers and call them out on their lies? Contact the breeder? It seems to me like there isn’t much that can be done since the horse isn’t under her control anymore, but maybe I am wrong about that?
            "Dangerous to ride" is a very subjective thing.

            Almost every horse is dangerous and unmanageable to someone. It's also very easy to create a "dangerous" horse from a green horse. It doesn't mean that horse is truly dangerous or that the problems can't be solved with better training and maturity of the horse.

            People who mess up a horse and rehome it as "dangerous" have a vested interest in not seeing anyone else succeed either.

            Does friend have any proof that the trainer has not really been able to fix this horse?

            Anyhow, I think your friend missed the opportunity to exercise her right of first refusal. Now horse belongs to a trainer with whom she has no existing relationship. Honestly there is nothing much she can do. Call up the trainer and say "I messed up with this horse 3 years ago so no one should ever try to ride her again?" Trainer would likely just respond that they fixed the problems with the horse and she is a good citizen now, and this is quite possibly true. Or go online with a cyber stalking attack and post "these are all lies!" on the sales sites? That just makes her look crazy and gets her blocked.

            I agree that most sales ads for horses contain a considerable amount of exaggeration or untruth or outright lies. That's just the business and why buyers need to approach cautiously.

            But it's also important to note that a horse being marketed to competent, ambitious, juniors or adult amateurs can be quite spicy, and can need to be in a training program. A quality competition horse for a junior or AA is not the same thing as a child safe or beginner safe backyard horse. First, many juniors and AA are extremely accomplished riders. Second, many are happy to have a talented horse that verges on being "too much horse" for them, the kind of horse they'd get into problems with if they were doing all the training but which will work for them with a good trainers help. In other words, there are some pretty feisty AA horses out there.

            Thus I imagine the truth lies somewhere between the puffery of the trainer and the anger of your friend.

            However the more money a horse costs, in general the more scrutiny the horse gets and the more say the buyers coach usually has in the matter. So the prospective buyers will likely have some expert advice to steer them away if the horse really is nuts.

            Where unsuspecting newbies end up with truly dangerous horses is more often at the bottom of the market where people without knowledge or expert advisors jump on a bargain or rescue opportunity.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by twelvebelles View Post
              I am looking for opinions on how to handle a situation a friend is in. She had an expensive young horse that was dangerous to ride and she got hurt. Long story short, my friend ended up selling the horse to back to its breeder with a contract for pennies and a 1st right of refusal on any future sale just in case, although the breeder said she just wanted her a pasture ornament. My friend loved the horse and became friends with the breeder, and they kept in touch. Fast forward three years into this arrangement and the breeder suddenly decides to put the horse into work because she thinks she can be fixed with better training. Of course, almost immediately the same naughty behavior starts again. The breeder contacts my friend and asks if she wants the horse back - per the contract - otherwise she will sell her because it’s not “working out the way she wants.” My friend is upset because it came out of nowhere and she thought it had been a forever home. She said she would have to think about it, and she wanted to talk to the trainer the horse was with before she made a decision. The breeder never responded to her. Some time goes by, and all of a sudden my friend sees a sales ad for the horse with a well known trainer in the area - and it is full of rather significant lies and asking for quite a bit of money. My friend is horrified because a) the breeder never responded to her and so she didn’t actually say she wouldn’t take the horse, so technically the 1st right wasn’t followed and b) the ad is marketing the horse as appropriate for children and AAs!

              What would you all do in this situation? File this under lessons learned, and say nothing and walk away? Contact the sellers and call them out on their lies? Contact the breeder? It seems to me like there isn’t much that can be done since the horse isn’t under her control anymore, but maybe I am wrong about that?
              It's been 3+ years since your friend has ridden (or even seen in person?) this horse; they have zero ability to say for certain the horse behaves the same as it did when they got hurt.

              Your friend was given the chance to buy the horse back, as the contract required. The FROR was indeed followed. Your friend isn't allowed to sit and think about it for as long as she wants. Lack of response was understandably taken as your friend declining to buy the horse. The contract should have specified how much time would be allowed for your friend to think about it, but I assume it didn't. Industry standard is probably somewhere in the 3-7 days range to expect a response.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by twelvebelles

                Yep. There is a lot more to this story to unpack.

                Maybe I should have been clearer. My friend is the one who responded right away. They have ignored her request to speak. The horse has not yet been sold (the ad was really red flag central). Since it hasn’t been sold, and they have’t responded to her, it seems like a sticky situation. Based on a post above, it sounds like because my friend has allowed them to get away with ignoring her for over a month her first right may be waived. Time to consult a real life attorney, I think!
                Why an attorney? What does your friend want as resolution? Does she want the horse back? If she really wanted the horse wouldn't she have said yes right away? Right of first refusal doesn't guarantee a price.

                What does "deny her request to speak" mean? Who is she meant to speak to?

                From the other side: the breeder sells a good horse, the buyer messes up with horse, breeder kindly takes horse back. Three years pass. Breeder finds a trainer who will take on the horse and sell it. Before sending the horse to the trainer, breeder asks the original buyer if they want the horse. Original buyer demurs. Breeder sells horse to trainer. Trainer markers horse.

                The horse legally belongs to the breeder, or perhaps now to the trainer. Your friend simply has no say in what happens next, anymore than if she'd sold a car or a house three years ago.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by twelvebelles

                  Yep. There is a lot more to this story to unpack.

                  Maybe I should have been clearer. My friend is the one who responded right away. They have ignored her request to speak. The horse has not yet been sold (the ad was really red flag central). Since it hasn’t been sold, and they have’t responded to her, it seems like a sticky situation. Based on a post above, it sounds like because my friend has allowed them to get away with ignoring her for over a month her first right may be waived. Time to consult a real life attorney, I think!
                  My friend is horrified because a) the breeder never responded to her and so she didn’t know it was happening
                  Clearly she did know the horse was at the trainer's and was for sale.

                  No, your friend said she needed to think about it and proceeded to dither for at least a few weeks. Honestly, RFR clauses are hard to make stick and she WAS given the option but chose not to buy the horse within a reasonable timeframe (a week or two). If it was important enough that consulting an attorney now looks like a reasonable action, then going to the breeder, calling multiple times, sending registered letters or going to the trainer in person would have been the thing to do instead of waiting for them to call her.

                  There wasn't any misrepresentation to her. If she wants to file a suit based on an ad she believes misrepresents the horse, but isn't the buyer, it is hard to imagine she has grounds for a suit against the owner or the trainer.

                  You say she has been involved for the past three years but she didn't know who was training the horse? Was she prevented from telephoning, emailing or going in person?

                  She isn't the owner so it is terribly unlikely anyone owes her anything further.

                  ​​​​

                  Comment


                    #10
                    If it is still for sale it would probably be cheaper to buy it than go the legal route.
                    It is better to ride 5 minutes a day than it is to ride 35 minutes on a Sunday.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Gone poof because the OP doesn't like our advice.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        So long as the horse is still for sale, Friend can buy it. What’s the problem?

                        This was too much horse for Friend anyway. Friend needs to let go.

                        Of course the seller is moving forward, they are selling. That’s an active situation.

                        If your friend wastes her time and money on an attorney, the attorney will clarify the definition of “sold” as “you are no longer involved In the decisions regarding this horse”. Breeder did Friend the courtesy of offering first refusal. Friend didn’t take it up. Wisely.

                        Let go. Time to move on.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Scribbler View Post
                          Gone poof because the OP doesn't like our advice.
                          Possibly Breeder learned about it. Hopefully Breeder realizes that Friend has more emotional attachment to the horse than is wise, and will be forgiving about thoughts and questions that will no longer seem like a good idea to Friend, once Friend cools off.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            At least someone at least saved the OP before it went poof. So while it likely doesn't matter at this point, I am really confused as to why someone who purchased a horse, found it dangerous to the point of being unrideable, would then sell it back to the breeder (whom one has to presume the person bought the horse from to begin based on the phrasing used in the OP) with a right of first refusal.

                            The horse was dangerous enough to sell back. Even if I loved the horse, I wouldn't ask for a ROFR. If you send the horse on once, I am trying to rationalize why you would expect to get a call asking if you want the horse back sometime down the road. You got rid of the animal for a reason...

                            Which then makes me wonder why someone would be so in love with a horse that they deemed dangerous enough to give up to the point that they'd be this upset YEARS later. Which then makes me think there's a lot of details being either left out or very muddled...
                            Do not spoil what you have by desiring what you have not. Remember that what you have now was once among the many things that you only hoped for.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by OverandOnward View Post

                              Possibly Breeder learned about it. Hopefully Breeder realizes that Friend has more emotional attachment to the horse than is wise, and will be forgiving about thoughts and questions that will no longer seem like a good idea to Friend, once Friend cools off.
                              Or "friend" didn't want the muddled version all over the internet.

                              Comment


                                #16
                                Well, it may not matter, but a properly written right of first refusal specifies an exact length of time. E.g. a week, or maybe in a VERY generous situation, a month.

                                Not horse related, but my office had a ROFR on vacant space on our floor. I think we had 10 days (not 10 business days) to contractually agree to the space or it was forfeited.

                                What did the contract allow?

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by Scribbler View Post
                                  Gone poof because the OP doesn't like our advice.
                                  No, it's because in typical COTH fashion, people jumped all over the OP while completely misunderstanding what the OP was saying. It's the breeder who did not respond, not the friend.

                                  She [the friend] said she would have to think about it, and she wanted to talk to the trainer the horse was with before she made a decision. The breeder never responded to her [the friend].
                                  The friend told the breeder she wanted to contact the the trainer, the breeder did not respond, and then the horse was listed for sale.
                                  "She is not fragile like a flower. She is fragile like a bomb."

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by SillyHorse View Post

                                    No, it's because in typical COTH fashion, people jumped all over the OP while completely misunderstanding what the OP was saying. It's the breeder who did not respond, not the friend.



                                    The friend told the breeder she wanted to contact the the trainer, the breeder did not respond, and then the horse was listed for sale.
                                    Given that the breeder had made the original offer of first refusal, to preserve her rights, the friend should have contacted the breeder two days later and bugged the breeder, and stated she was still considering it. Perhaps asked when her deadline for a decision was, if that was not in the original contract.

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by SillyHorse View Post

                                      No, it's because in typical COTH fashion, people jumped all over the OP while completely misunderstanding what the OP was saying. It's the breeder who did not respond, not the friend.

                                      The friend told the breeder she wanted to contact the the trainer, the breeder did not respond, and then the horse was listed for sale.
                                      I misread that section.
                                      However, I’d assume that breeder was waiting on the OP's friend to contact the trainer, which is what they said they wanted to do before they made their decision. Then, when over a month went by, breeder assumed person decided to pass. Friend should have contacted breeder within a few days of the original message to follow up.

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by SillyHorse View Post

                                        No, it's because in typical COTH fashion, people jumped all over the OP while completely misunderstanding what the OP was saying. It's the breeder who did not respond, not the friend.



                                        The friend told the breeder she wanted to contact the the trainer, the breeder did not respond, and then the horse was listed for sale.
                                        But still, it's the OP that would have an obligation to respond to the ROFR before it expires. "I'll think about it" isn't a response. Yes, it would be nice if the breeder had responded with "ok great, let me know what you decide [before the ROFR expires which is in XX days]." But, unless the contract was worded very strangely, the OP would have had to make some sort of decision within a specific period of time.

                                        So, again, what did the contract say? If there was no specific period of time, "I'll think about it" is as good as "no, I forfeit my ROFR option."

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X