• 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

  • Link to the report?

    Comment


    • Again just to re-iterate what has been said-- THE REPORTED 'FACTS' WERE WRONG!

      No Broken Jaw
      No $7,000 vet bill to be paid with donations

      The vet bill was $4500--not the $7,000 that was reported as fact, not the $10,000 that was reported as fact before the $7,000

      The horse was released from UC Davis and still the new owner, who did nothing other than purchase a horse from a bad situation, can not get him home.
      Last edited by dilligaff2; Feb. 7, 2013, 04:00 PM. Reason: avoid confusion
      Proud scar wearing member of the Bold, Banned and Bitchen clique

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Hillside H Ranch View Post
        Yes, the vet report (all 32 pages) has been publicly posted for all to see.
        Care to provide those of us who are not in the know a link to said report?

        Comment


        • The horse is an asset and there are judgments outstanding for JBs bills not paid. It could be that JB cannot sell property without first paying off the creditors - so that any horse sales could be held up in legal or by creditors seeking payment. It makes anyone wanting the buy an asset from JB to think twice as to whether she is free to sell off assets without court or legal entanglements.

          Comment


          • Wow. Paying $4500 for what amounts to a few days of NSAID/ABX followed by some dedicated use of 4x4 gauze and a weak tea of betadine and some dabs of abx ointment? If that was me, I'd be livid. Scratch that, I'd be beyond livid.
            Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Justa Bob View Post
              The horse is an asset and there are judgments outstanding for JBs bills not paid. It could be that JB cannot sell property without first paying off the creditors - so that any horse sales could be held up in legal or by creditors seeking payment. It makes anyone wanting the buy an asset from JB to think twice as to whether she is free to sell off assets without court or legal entanglements.
              The horse is NOT being held to pay off creditors.

              To the best of my knowledge there is NO legality preventing Jill from selling horses off. There are judgements against her, but with no action then taken by the courts. As mentioned a zillion posts ago, a judgement does nothing other than to affirm a debt is owed, unless it then says how that debt is to be resolved.
              Laurie

              Comment


              • I found the vet report (on the Rising Star Facebook page).

                The way I read it RS was found with one eye swollen shut and the other eye almost swollen shut and his face/head swollen.
                Though he was found to not have a broken jaw I can see why those injuries not being treated at all are grounds to do something with him.

                Comment


                • Yup, but it probably didn't rise to the level of preventing him from going to his new home where he would have received care and feeding except for the fact that other horses were in much poorer condition and the facilities are awful and the whole thing is just a mess.

                  But if you take RS's case alone, the care he received was not care that is typically done in a clinic setting unless the horse is owned or managed by people utterly incapable of handling a horse and providing minimal level treatment (or insanely rich and helping out the vet school funding). Horse people - experienced horse people - are somewhat accomplished in giving meds (oral, IV and IM) and cleaning/treating minor wounds, we all know this is what you sign up for when you own horses.

                  If this had happened at any other farm without the complicating factors, chances are the vet would have come out, dispensed abx/nsaids, stained the eye, given some trx instructions and potentially xrayed the jaw to rule out broken bones, but maybe not if the horse was eating normally and not distressed. Chances are a vet dealing with an experienced horseman wouldn't even have scheduled a f/u visit, and instead would rely on said owner to call if the condition changed. I'm thinking if this happened to me I would have been out $400-600, tops (less because I wouldn't need any supplies/meds from the vet except abx).

                  So yeah, I can see where that bill is pretty stupifying if I was faced with paying it and I wasn't the person who did anything other than enter into a legal transaction that would have ultimately benefited the horse. It's true that no good deed goes unpunished.
                  Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DMK View Post
                    Wow. Paying $4500 for what amounts to a few days of NSAID/ABX followed by some dedicated use of 4x4 gauze and a weak tea of betadine and some dabs of abx ointment? If that was me, I'd be livid. Scratch that, I'd be beyond livid.
                    Plus general and specialty examinations (which, when one is dealing with the head and especially eyes, is a prudent decision IMO), radiographs, blood work, care administration, boarding, etc. I don't see the amount as surprising - in fact, it seems very reasonable to me. Of course, there's also the matter of the dental float, hoof trim, and tests ordered because of anorexia that isn't SOP for "normal" traumatic injuries...

                    Perhaps the RS could have been treated as an outpatient, thus reducing a potential vet bill, if only he had been able to get care without needing to be seized.

                    eta: I haven't had to make any claims yet, knock on wood, but wouldn't insurance normally cover some of the bill? I'd assume a horse like RS would be covered...?

                    Comment


                    • That may depend on whether RSF's insurance was in effect on him when he got injured - the time frame seems tight between purchase and injury. I'd be surprised if JB had him insured, given her bill paying habits.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by dilligaff2 View Post
                        Again just to re-iterate what has been said-- THE REPORTED 'FACTS' WERE WRONG!

                        No Broken Jaw
                        https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?...7839611&type=3

                        Right.. No broken jaw but he did have:

                        Right eye swollen shut with marked edema – right eye is swollen completely shut but can be manually opened with some force”

                        Lacerations under eye

                        superficial corneal ulcer

                        Blood present coming from the mouth

                        Fracture of 104 to gingival, fracture of 304 into three fragments, uncomplicated fracture of 404. The vet goes on to described feed packing and teeth in various stages of decay.

                        multiple buccal mucosal ulcers bilaterally in the region of the inter dental space (associated with trauma and not from enamel points)

                        Edema of the right foreleg was also appreciated and of the pectoral muscles between the forelimbs (described as a 2-3 inch thick pocket)

                        Ribs visible on both sides, but vertebrae still covered with muscle

                        Long feet x 4
                        So we have a stallion, with a BCS score of 3. He has one eye swollen completely closed with an corneal ulcer. He has multiple broken teeth, various lacerations and swelling.

                        Okay, his jaw wasn’t broken, but his teeth were – and his eye was swollen shut – and he had not been treated by a vet.

                        This is “okay” how?
                        APPSOLUTE CHOCKLATE - Photo by Kathy Colman

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by DMK View Post
                          Wow. Paying $4500 for what amounts to a few days of NSAID/ABX followed by some dedicated use of 4x4 gauze and a weak tea of betadine and some dabs of abx ointment? If that was me, I'd be livid. Scratch that, I'd be beyond livid.
                          ?
                          I leafed through the report and found the horse was radiographed for the head injury, treated for an eye injury, dental extractions for broken teeth, etc, alongside wound care and was hospitalized for quite a while while requiring frequent medication (one of which is GastroGard), which means that his hospitalization cost alone was probably decent.
                          As Peter, Paul, and Mary say, a dragon lives forever.

                          Comment


                          • the bill itself is not outrageous. It's that it does not rise to the level of 6 weeks admission. That's not UCDavis' fault, but in any other normal case, this horse would have a)never went to a clinic setting and b) if he had, in an abundance of caution, would have probably been released in 48 hours, tops. The fact that there was a new legal owner asking for him to be released does beg the question of why he was not released? And if there was some dispute as to that ownership/final resolution, why was the horse not released to a lower cost/more appropriate level of care, such as a boarding facility?

                            He clearly needed food and some basic care (trim, dental, etc. - none of which were attributed to injury but rather age/neglect) but do you take your horse to the equivalent of an inpatient hospital admission to do that? BCS of 3 is horrible IMO, but does not rise to the level of seizure if one goes by the many horses in JB's care that are BCS 3 and not getting follow up visits by our last accounts,so why does this BCS rise to the level of an i/p admit?

                            I suspect if the reason he stayed there is the MHS didn't have the facilities to handle the horse so he stayed at UCDavis and the bill kept going ka ching ka ching (purely my speculation based on reading the entire bill). He's a big tough stallion by all accounts and I bet wiping his owies off with betadine tea wasn't easy unless you were experienced in handling horses. That's fine - if MHS can't handlethe seized horses and they got the contract/revenue/responsibility to care for, maybe they should look inward and get some help in handling these kind of cases. If you have to resort to this level of cost/care management to take care of of this level of medical management in your seizures, I don't know that this is the best use of Marin Co taxpayer funds, but I don't live there, so it's NMP...

                            But if you were the person who bought the horse in good faith BEFORE any of this happened, would you want to pay that bill? Would you wonder what there was about this case that warranted the horse not being released to your care much earlier? And because you happened to be caught in the middle of this you now have to fight (read: spend more money) to get the horse released? And for bonus points, get your name drug through the mud by various mini-minions and alters on this thread?
                            Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                            Comment


                            • I don't think anyone is saying the condition of the horse was okay. It certainly sounds like he had the crap beat out of him. I also think his care was actually appropriate; sounds like there were serious concerns about his eyes and his jaw/facial structures. Thus the rads, optho consults, etc. But it is important to have accurate information, and there is a difference between a broken jaw vs. non-broken jaw, as well as a BCS of 1 vs. 3.
                              As far as the charges go, I don't think any of us arm-chair quarterbacks can remark upon that. If you read the entire report he had a ton of work done; multiple rounds of blood-work, fecals, PCR for EVA, optho consults, rads, etc. etc. That's all going to add up, especially at a large university institution. Sounds like he was quite beat up and in need of care. UC Davis would also be very careful to dot their "I's" and cross their "T's" knowing this case would probably end up in litigation.
                              I just hope he can go to Ronda soon, settle in, and get on with his life.
                              Already excited about our 2016 foals! Expecting babies by Indoctro, Diamant de Semilly, Zirocco Blue and Calido!
                              https://www.facebook.com/pages/Hills...h/112931293227

                              Comment


                              • hillside, I can say I have never had a horse stay at a vet school without daily blood work, etc. That's just part of your daily admit routine (and daily care charges) in my experience (and I wish I had less experience). And um, mine were not any where near a BCS of 3... or 4... or 5... or 6... They even get blood work between discharge notice and me picking them up.
                                Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by Appsolute View Post
                                  https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?...7839611&type=3

                                  Right.. No broken jaw but he did have:



                                  So we have a stallion, with a BCS score of 3. He has one eye swollen completely closed with an corneal ulcer. He has multiple broken teeth, various lacerations and swelling.

                                  Okay, his jaw wasn’t broken, but his teeth were – and his eye was swollen shut – and he had not been treated by a vet.

                                  This is “okay” how?

                                  Nobody said it was Okay. Don't put words in my mouth. What I said is that the 'facts' that had been presented on this thread again and again and again by persons who claimed to have insider knowledge on the condition of the horse and the costs associated were wrong.

                                  Remember all the discussion of a body score of '1' and him nearly being put down and having a broken jaw?
                                  At first we were given a vet bill in the $10,000 range and climbing. Then a report came out and said in the $7000 range. In reality it was $4500. Yes, for treatment he needed. Nobody is disputing that--just that the actual paperwork doesn't jive with the 'insider' knowledge presented and taken verbatim by a lot of participants in this thread.

                                  That was the only point. So if those presented facts were wrong, what else has been? Only actual documentation like what has been made public can give a clearer picture.

                                  And as DMK said, *if* this horse would have been anywhere else, he would not have required hospitalization for routine care.
                                  Proud scar wearing member of the Bold, Banned and Bitchen clique

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by Appsolute View Post
                                    This is “okay” how?

                                    I did not see anyone saying it was "OK"

                                    This has been driving me nuts about this thread for ages - Person A says 'wait a minute, this doesn't seem quite accurate' and Person B is all "HOW CAN YOU DEFEND JB!!?!??!?!!"
                                    "smile a lot can let us ride happy,it is good thing"

                                    My CANTER blog.

                                    Comment


                                    • I'm simply saying that none of us were directly involved in the case, so none of us can accurately determine what the horse did/did not need care wise, so I'm not sure why we are even discussing if the horse should/should not have been hospitalized in the manner in which it was?
                                      As far as daily blood-work, I think that depends upon why the horse is in the hospital. I've certainly had horses in a University setting (orthopedic though, not medical) and they definitely did NOT do daily bloodwork. It's a case-by-case basis.
                                      Already excited about our 2016 foals! Expecting babies by Indoctro, Diamant de Semilly, Zirocco Blue and Calido!
                                      https://www.facebook.com/pages/Hills...h/112931293227

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by dilligaff2 View Post
                                        Nobody said it was Okay. Don't put words in my mouth. What I said is that the 'facts' that had been presented on this thread again and again and again by persons who claimed to have insider knowledge on the condition of the horse and the costs associated were wrong.

                                        Remember all the discussion of a body score of '1' and him nearly being put down and having a broken jaw?
                                        At first we were given a vet bill in the $10,000 range and climbing. Then a report came out and said in the $7000 range. In reality it was $4500. Yes, for treatment he needed. Nobody is disputing that--just that the actual paperwork doesn't jive with the 'insider' knowledge presented and taken verbatim by a lot of participants in this thread.

                                        That was the only point. So if those presented facts were wrong, what else has been? Only actual documentation like what has been made public can give a clearer picture.
                                        I think most of the things you listed above as facts were things that were assumptions by people as the thread went on. Someone would say "I heard.....".


                                        I am glad to hear RS is doing better and his injuries were far more minimal than originally rumored.

                                        Comment


                                        • She's all the way on the other coast, and gets involved in this mess... Then when HER horse needs to be physically rescued and treated from painful and possibly life threatening injuries she shows up out of the woodwork? THEN wants to sue the agency that stepped in and got him care?? SERIOUSLY?????
                                          Did they (the MHS) communicate with RS about the treatment and condition of the horse? Did they call her and say "hey, we seized your horse at the owners, he was in bad shape. He is at UC Davis, please call the vet." Did they work with her to come up with a treatment alternative that didn't involve such expensive care? Or when they thought there was a jaw fracture and potentially high vet bills, did they offer her the chance to choose an alternative such as euthanasia? It doesn't sound like they engaged her in the process of care for her horse at all. If it was my horse, I'd sue. Just because you are a non-profit doesn't mean you can dick people around.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X