I can see why a barn owner wouldn’t want to deal with an owner part leasing her horse. She presumably vetted the owner before accepting her in the barn. She has a contract with the owner. The owner would be bringing in another client to the barn. The owner would be the one interacting with this new client in the barn, answering questions, making sure she understands the rules, making sure that she fits in with the other clients. Why would she want to do that? It’s not like she’s being paid any more to deal with 2 clients than she is to deal with one.
3 Likes
Well, maybe in a perfect world. Seen good part boarders and seen some turn into a real horror story for the BO and other boarders. With no written agreement with BO, its a PITA to deal with. Such experiences get shared with other BOs and they get leery of dealing with the part boarder issues. Can understand why they discourage them.
Also, many barns are relying on each boarder to use and pay for additional services like training and lessons. If HO depends on PB 3 days a week to exercise horse instead of paying for a barn service and PB doesn’t take any lessons, thats a hit on the barns bottom line and budget. Boarded horses have to generate additional income these days-board alone is break even at best. Weve spent weeks discussing that sad fact.
Shouldn’t be a surprise…long as it is clearly communicated.
1 Like
While it certainly could go that way if expectations are not clearly outlined to the horse owner, more often the horse owner communicates expectations to the part boarder (barn hours if any, cleaning up of areas, riding while lessons occurring policy, etc) and the barn owner has very little to do with the part boarder at all apart from saying hello/trying to remember an extra name.
Any communication about the horse is generally done between barn owner and horse owner with the expectation that if there is anything pressing, the horse owner will communicate the necessary details to the part boarder.
1 Like
Yeah but if there is no formal agreement between BO and part boarder it is often a set up for conflict in the barn. We always advise boarders to tell the BO if other clients are not following barn rules, so, what if its a PB who has no agreement with the BO, just with HO?
Been through that scenario, with BO not caring who HOs brought in as PBs in barns over decades of boarding, almost never ended well. Especially when PB was a close friend or relative of HO, too awkward for HO to correct actions with close friend or relative, difficult for other boarders to complain about PB actions to HO and BO was uninvolved…until they kicked somebody out creating more drama.
And I have been on both sides of half leasing/ PB but only in barns where PB and BO always had a written agreement with BOTH sides covering barn rules and always had to meet, have a conversation with and approve any half leaser/ part border before adding them to the barn community.
1 Like
Any sane BO/mgr should have paperwork in place that needs to be signed by anyone who throws a leg over a horse on the property that includes not only a liability release, but also a list of barn rules which they agree to follow.
That’s been my experience (not that I’ve part boarded, but I’ve been at establishments that did.)
7 Likes
Any part boarder should be provided with barn rules and be expected to comply. If part boarders are truly disruptive the BO has every right to ask the HO to end the agreement or move the horse. Many PB situations are “in barn” meaning the new PB is an existing client, maybe a lesson student stepping up to part boarding or a client whose horse is laid up. The idea that part boarders are somehow rubes or cretins who don’t know how to act is insulting. I’m a long time PB and have never brought scads of unruly relatives to the barn, never chased the chickens or left a bridle without wiping the bit and doing a tidy figure 8.
If the HO approves, in many cases the part boarder might be happy to take lessons if they feel welcome at the barn. When I was an informal PBer for years at 3 different barns on my friend’s horse I usually did take lessons on him. Honestly, if I’d been made to feel unwelcome or as if my presence were a hassle to the BO I would have been less likely to do so.
Someone up thread mentioned loss of income for BO from part boarding because the HO would otherwise be paying for rides. That makes sense but many times those paid rides were provided by fellow boarders anyhow, not a pro. If I as a HO can have that same person riding my horse and instead of paying for the service, get paid for it, why would I not.
Barn owners can have whatever rules they want and whatever fees they choose. As long as everyone is in agreement. I’d be curious to know if the fee applies to a PB who is already a client ie a lesson student looking to step up or a current boarder looking for more saddle time.
4 Likes
I’ve seen this in acase where HO really couldn’t affford the board, and found a friend/acquaintance to pay 1/2 of the expenses.
As long as both follow barn rules, and accept equal liabilty, there is no problem, so long as they both share equitably. Squabbles remain their own.
A BO charging more for faclity use in a case such as this creates a ripping sound in my ears. Rip off!
3 Likes
The only time I can see an argument for a part-boarder consuming more resources than a “regular” boarder is if they want to keep their own tack/grooming supplies and there isn’t enough room to accommodate. In that case I could see BO saying “there’s one saddle rack/bridle hook/tack locker/trunk allotted per stall, to store additional equipment will incur a storage fee of $xx per month”. But then I would expect that to be enforced on the rest of the boarders too.
2 Likes
I thought of an analogy!
Imagine you rent out a suite in your house to a tenant. You vet the potential tenant well. They move in, and all is good. Then they get a job that has them out of town 14 days on and 14 days off. Even better for you! But then they decide they should be allowed to sublet the suite to a coworker on the opposite shift.
Would you be ok with this? Or would you be pissed that someone you didn’t vet now has access to YOUR house. You may also have started to take for granted the 2 weeks of quiet and refrained from raising rent…that quiet is now gone.
Unlike visiting friends/family, your part boarder has access to the facility without you there. Your BO should vet them just like a new boarder, and should be compensated for their time, and the additional stress and liability of one more person on their property.
I expect a percentage of my boarders to be casual/light use. if everyone leased out their horses for maximum usage, I would likely choose to up board and decrease number of boarders, so in that way, a lease rider does increase the usage and their ARE costs attached to the BO
3 Likes
Except the actual thing that is being ‘sublet’ in the part-boarder is not belonging to the BO. It is private property belonging to the boarder who is leasing to another rider. It’s not the same.
4 Likes
But its occurring on the BOs private property, it IS the BOs business who is on their property under their umbrella of liability interacting with BOs client community using BOs facilities.
You could argue HO is subletting the barn services PB has full use of and not just the horse.
6 Likes
Do the BOs have decision making authority over what horse a person brings? Or do they just claim authority in the event of a dangerous / hard to deal-with animal?
When a horse dies, does the BO get to help decide what new horse the owner buys? Or just deal with that horse and that horse’s needs/personality once the horse is in the barn?
1 Like
BO gets to choose the horses and humans at the facility.
If a human isn’t a good fit, you can end the relationship.
If the horse isn’t a good fit, you can end the relationship.
If the new horse bought by human (used to be a good fit human) isn’t a good fit, you can end the relationship.
If they decide they’ve had enough, and they don’t want anymore boarders, the BO can close up shop. They have no obligation to horse, human or otherwise to remain in business if they choose not to.
Edited to add: In my neck of the woods, part boarders need approval from barn owner/trainer. Sometimes even a lesson or two to confirm a good fit before the agreement is confirmed. Plus the requisite waiver and barn rules. In my experience, this works quite well at keeping the peace and allowing everyone to be on the same page, so to say, with respect to expectations.
2 Likes
If i had a horse that was a hazard, or otherwize a ‘big problem’ i would expect eviction…of that horse.
If i were a royal PITA, ditto
If my leasee was causing problems i would expect that they would be shown the exit.
What i wouldn’t expect is monetizing that i have leased my horse.
1 Like
Yes, BOs can determine what horses are allowed on the property. If BO is also a trainer or associated with one, they may want to participate in client selection of new horses…and charge a commission. Long as its disclosed in the contract, their right. Client has the right to go elsewhere.
1 Like
Well, the apartment thing happens ALL the time. Single people become non single people. People without kids have kids.
Being able to increase board is a privilege and that’s ok, increase it at will to cover all boarders being fully involved.
But, it can’t really be equated to renting apartments out because there are pretty detailed laws about discrimination, how much rents can be raised, etc. for housing of people. You’d be hard-pressed to find a legal way in much of Canada to raise the rent in the sharesies situation you outlined as long as occupation remained within legal limits. And even if it didn’t, you’d probably be looking at termination of lease rather than a rent increase.
2 Likes
lol, i totally get that BOs have a hard-line philosophy on their rights as a property owner. Heck, i have two gates on my driveway…the one at the top by the road locked! But…charging for a leasee is just money-grubbing. If your property is suffering because your boarders over-use, then gezus, put in a timeclock and have everybody punch-in and see who is using too much and charge them too.
1 Like
But, again, HO is subletting use of BOs facilities, not just their horse. BOs have a right to approve PBs and insist on a signed agreement and to charge a fee if they want. Ideally that would be in HOs contract or an addendum signed by each boarder, not sprung by surprise. But they can do it. And boarders can exercise their right to disagree by moving.
1 Like
not disagreeing they (BOs) have the right to interview leasee. But to charge extra is the thing that sticks in my craw. It’s taking advantage of a situation. You are not getting enough money for the use of your land and buildings…then charge everybody more. But to take-it-out on somebody who can’t keep their horse in work all by themselves just doesn’t seem …ethical.
Oh wait! i think i get it.
So barn owner is a trainer with a side-hussle exercising horses. And a leasee would cut-into that $, so therefore, they get to charge for the leasee, cause they have to get exercise money somehow.
Or, there is a trainer there who exercises and kicks-back a percentage of their ride-money.
I suppose i understand now. I wasn’t thinking of that kind of barn. But i know there are a lot like this.
