• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

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 are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

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 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Doing business with JILL BURNELL? BEWARE.

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 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!
    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.
    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.
    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. 14, 2013, 12:23 AM.
    Practice! Patience! Persistence!
    http://www.mariposasporthorses.com/
    https://www.facebook.com/MariposaSportHorses/

    Comment


    • 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.
      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, 01:17 AM.
      Practice! Patience! Persistence!
      http://www.mariposasporthorses.com/
      https://www.facebook.com/MariposaSportHorses/

      Comment


      • 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

        Comment


        • 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.

          Comment


          • 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.

            Comment


            • 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!

              Comment


              • 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"

                Comment


                • 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.



                  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.

                  Comment


                  • 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.

                    Comment


                    • 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!
                      Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                      Comment


                      • 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.

                        Comment


                        • 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.
                          APPSOLUTE CHOCKLATE - Photo by Kathy Colman

                          Comment


                          • 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.
                            McDowell Racing Stables

                            Home Away From Home

                            Comment


                            • 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.

                              Comment


                              • 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.

                                Comment


                                • CAN WE PLEASE GET THIS THREAD BACK ON TOPIC!

                                  Comment


                                  • 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.

                                    Comment


                                    • 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

                                      Comment


                                      • 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.

                                        Comment


                                        • 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.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X