On Jul 8, 12:14=A0pm, NancyD....@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Eileen:
>
> >Somehow, I don't think she wants to buy a lame horse
> >and pay the vet bill on it . . . that was my thinking, not
> >a million dollar law suit. Stuck with a'you broke it you
> >bought it' accusation,
>
> But this may well be the case - acute laminitis brought on by a change
> in management. =A0This *is* her responsibility.
>
> >dealing with broker/owner dingbats,
> >and then a horse you now own and cannot sell or ride.
>
> It would be the same if he had been purchased outright, rather than
> taken on trial. =A0**** happens.
>
> >And no money for something useful. That looks like a nightmare to me.
>
> Sure. =A0But it's a nightmare we all face, a situation we can all be
> in. =A0It's part of having horses.
>
> Not that anyone's asking, but I vote for doing the right thing for the
> horse. =A0To do otherwise is, IMO, cruel. =A0Were he here, the vet would
> have been called first, and the broker kept informed. =A0I would assume
> the horse was now mine, and I'd suck it up and deal.
>
> Nancy DeMarco
> Mason, NH
I would agree with this and buy the horse if I felt liable for his
founder (or whatever is going on) HOWEVER...he was already showing
signs of lameness before he arrived. I was concerned about it and was
assured that it was a 'stone bruise' and demanded and got a 14 day
trial. Well, guess what, it's no stone bruise and now the broker will
not retrieve the animal, probably hoping the 14 days will expire and I
will be obligated to buy the lame horse for full price. They know I
don't have a truck and trailer. The broker has physically and in-
person, inspected the horse and still felt it was a 'stone bruise' and
will not get the horse. I cannot legally treat him. I cannot contact
the owner directly as I do not know who it is and the broker will not
say. I tried tracing the brand, but have not been successful.
|
