Benchmark Sporthorses?

[Lunabear1988]

Placing blame doesn’t really help the situation at this point but I hope it’s a learning experience for all involved, if that’s the only thing to take away. There are lessons here for the buyer, the vet and the seller. That’s why with my wobbler horse, I reached out to the seller/trainer. Not to blame but as a professional who cares deeply about the horses in her program, I thought she could learn something and use that knowledge later.

I hope the horse does great after surgery and has a happy live!

[Simkie]

@Marigold we have no idea how much of this frustration has developed simply because Jessica refused to take a call.

Sometimes sellers have to have actual conversations. This, imo, was one of them. If it devolved, Jessica could’ve ended it gracefully, as one occasionally has to do, especially when working in sales. But avoiding it entirely is just really unprofessional.

[GraceLikeRain]

@Simkie

But avoiding it entirely is just really unprofessional.

agreed. especially when my understanding is that she has taken back/consigned prior sale horses that didn’t work out for a buyer. If the seller was confident it was behavioral, I’m surprised there was no offer to take the horse back and find a more appropriate home.

[phoenixrises]

If he’d come straight off the track this is what I would call “tracky” movement (very technical term) however he’d been off since 2021 I think they said. That right hind is a HUGE red flag in pretty much every moment of movement.

[enjoytheride]

@GraceLikeRain

agreed. especially when my understanding is that she has taken back/consigned prior sale horses that didn’t work out for a buyer. If the seller was confident it was behavioral, I’m surprised there was no offer to take the horse back and find a more appropriate home.

We don’t really know what happened because Jessica hasn’t given any extra details beyond when she spoke to the buyer she told them she was concerned as the horse needed to be with a pro and the seller told her she had a trainer and a program (Which she did not). She didn’t return a phone call but did anything else happen to make her not want to do that?

[Simkie]

Spoke to the buyer? When? It doesn’t sound like she’s ever actually spoken to the buyer at all. The buyer has mentioned a few times how she’d really like to actually speak to Jessica, and Jessica won’t do that.

[TWilson]

@Warmblood1

From what I understand, you are not a pro nor did you have a trainer working with you when purchasing and IMO, that should have been a red flag to the seller.

The buyer told the seller that she had a good program for the horse before she bought the horse, then admitted here that she didn’t have a trainer until after the purchase. It’s not the seller’s fault that the buyer lied to her.

[trubandloki]

@TWilson

@Warmblood1

From what I understand, you are not a pro nor did you have a trainer working with you when purchasing and IMO, that should have been a red flag to the seller.

The buyer told the seller that she had a good program for the horse before she bought the horse, then admitted here that she didn’t have a trainer until after the purchase. It’s not the seller’s fault that the buyer lied to her.

I am missing how that changes the whole situation that the horse was advertised as one thing and ended up being something else?

[TWilson]

@trubandloki

I am missing how that changes the whole situation that the horse was advertised as one thing and ended up being something else?

I was commenting on Warmblood1’s assertion that the fact that the buyer did not have a trainer working with her at the time of purchase should have been a red flag to the seller. The horse was advertised as one that needed to be in a good program. The seller was told that the buyer DID have a trainer with a good program. If the buyer had told the seller that she didn’t have a trainer, the seller presumably wouldn’t have sold the horse to her.

[Simkie]

@TWilson

The buyer told the seller that she had a good program for the horse before she bought the horse, then admitted here that she didn’t have a trainer until after the purchase. It’s not the seller’s fault that the buyer lied to her.

I don’t see a lie. The buyer was in a new area, found a trainer, found the horse, and the horse went directly into a program with the trainer. Buyer said horse would be in a program, horse was in a program.

In hindsight, Amos admits that the trainer should have been more involved in the purchase of the horse. But we don’t know what we don’t know, and apparently Jessica never made any inquires regarding the length of the relationship, or spoke with the trainer directly.

[enjoytheride]

She spoke to the buyer when they purchased the horse regarding the horses need for a pro ride. The buyer says Jessica won’t answer a phone call but hasn’t elaborated if there were emails or texts and what was said. Jessica has taken back horses before when they weren’t as advertised and she doesn’t ghost people as soon as the check is cashed so it would be unusual if she did. Maybe she will elaborate.

I also think you’re putting a lot on a seller to ask a buyer how long they’ve been with a trainer or to speak with them when a buyer says the right things. She has refused to sell horses to people before because they weren’t suitable.

[TWilson]

@Simkie

I don’t see a lie. The buyer was in a new area, found a trainer, found the horse, and the horse went directly into a program with the trainer. Buyer said horse would be in a program, horse was in a program.

In hindsight, Amos admits that the trainer should have been more involved in the purchase of the horse. But we don’t know what we don’t know, and apparently Jessica never made any inquires regarding the length of the relationship, or spoke with the trainer directly.

I’m definitely in the minority because I don’t blame the seller anywhere near as much as most people here are doing. She is in the business of selling horses, not counseling or babysitting buyers. The buyer led the seller to believe that she had a relationship with a trainer with a good program when in fact she did not at the time she said it. That to me is a lie. The trainer couldn’t have been more involved in the purchase of the horse because the relationship did not start until after the purchase.

This seller is not for everyone and she freely admits it. Clearly this buyer got herself in over her head. Had she admitted at the time of purchase that she was not working with a trainer, all of this might have been avoided.

[Marigold]

@Simkie

But avoiding it entirely is just really unprofessional.

She didn’t avoid it entirely - she offered to discuss it in writing, which is what I would do when dealing with someone with this level of strong feeling. I do think I would have scheduled a call, which she did not, but I understand not taking a cold call from someone who is clearly this upset.

(I’m coming across like I know her - I do not. I’ve window shopped her listings, but I’ve never interacted with her personally in any way. She may be great, she may be terrible, I have no way of knowing. Just adding my thoughts based on my customer experiences in a completely non-horse-related profession).

[Simkie]

@enjoytheride

I also think you’re putting a lot on a seller to ask a buyer how long they’ve been with a trainer or to speak with them when a buyer says the right things. She has refused to sell horses to people before because they weren’t suitable.

You think I’m putting a lot on a seller to do a little extra due diligence on a horse marketed as “pro ride” and “behavioral issues”??

This is probably a horse that shouldn’t’ve been offered to the public at all if she thought he was that complex and needed something so specific. This is exactly when you pull out your rolodex of people you know who can work with a horse like this and offer him to them directly.

But if she’s going to offer him publicly with a lot of caveats, then yeah–there is SOME onus on her to get him into the right spot.

Or, if you think that some verbiage around it on her ads is enough, then just slap a “buy it now” button on there, and caveat emptor. But then all of this “I work hard to find a good fit between horse and buyer” is really just fluff.

[Warmblood1]

@TWilson

I’m definitely in the minority because I don’t blame the seller anywhere near as much as most people here are doing. She is in the business of selling horses, not counseling or babysitting buyers. The buyer led the seller to believe that she had a relationship with a trainer with a good program when in fact she did not at the time she said it. That to me is a lie. The trainer couldn’t have been more involved in the purchase of the horse because the relationship did not start until after the purchase.

I agree that sellers should not have to babysit, but don’t you think sellers have an obligation to sell sound horses? Especially when all quirks have been represented as merely behavioral?

[fivestrideline]

@Simkie

Spoke to the buyer? When? It doesn’t sound like she’s ever actually spoken to the buyer at all

Before the purchase. She laid out the horse’s temperament and program needs as they understood them (both in the ad, and she claims to have laid it out when speaking directly to the buyer). She then - according to the buyer - offered to communicate over text or email.

I know some people prefer a phone conversation but I also don’t think that takes precedence over a person preferring written communication. In general, if there’s any indication a customer may be upset, written communication is best (because receipts). If it becomes clear the customer is reasonable, THEN a phone conversation can be scheduled.

I don’t agree with a lot of what Jess/Benchmark says about kissing spines and buyers, and I think that deciding this horse didn’t need a vet vs more training is a bit silly considering the level of experience the seller has. HOWEVER, I don’t think this situation is the seller’s fault. I think the buyer ignored a series of compounding red flags and is now looking for someone to blame. It’s hard to learn these expensive lessons, and I’m very sympathetic to that, BTDT! But I don’t think this is totally on Jess/Benchmark.

[TWilson]

@Warmblood1

don’t you think sellers have an obligation to sell sound horses? Especially when all quirks have been represented as merely behavioral?

What is the definition of a “sound horse”? I do think that sellers should feel obligated to disclose what they know about the horses they are selling and then let the buyer decide what is an acceptable level of risk and what is not. Here is the quote from the seller regarding how she approached his issues:

@Jleegriffith

I did not know about his back. He had a bump on his knee which I had xrayed and was disclosed. It was not an issue. I did not have any reason to think he had kissing spine but a lot of them do. His top line was beautiful, used back well, lovely mover, scopey jumper, etc.

I agree with those who have pointed out that the horse improved over the course of the videos that were presented, so I don’t think the seller’s assessment of the horse was unreasonable. Presumably the buyer also thought the horse was sound at the time of purchase, or she wouldn’t have bought it.

[barnesthenoble]

@Warmblood1

but don’t you think sellers have an obligation to sell sound horses? Especially when all quirks have been represented as merely behavioral?

That is a really unfair and difficult bar to set, IMO. Jess, to the best of her knowledge, believed the horse was sound. She concluded, not unreasonably with the way the horse was presenting improvement over his time with them, that the issues were likely behavioral. She did not see a reason to explore further veterinary diagnostics because the horse was improving. And who gets to decide sound? As we’ve hashed out in this thread and many others, definitions of sound can vary widely across owners, trainers, vets, etc. Whether you think someone’s definition of sound is morally or ethically right or properly informed is a different discussion, but this is why it’s imperative to do your due diligence on any purchase.

Jess disclosed pretty clearly her perspective on the issues and provided pretty comprehensive video of the horse’s behavior. It doesn’t make financial sense at the price point she’s selling horses at to do a full set of rads for a sale horse that is improving in the work. If that is something buyers want, they need to either pay for it themselves or be shopping at a much higher price point.

We are watching these videos with the benefit of hindsight and the knowledge that the horse has a major back issue. If the horse was running happily around a cross country course right now, we’d watch the videos and conclude it was just a big, green horse needing strength and to learn how to go forward into contact. And I know there are cases out there where the first few rides back looked like the videos we saw and wound up not being gnarly KS or a physical issue, but an issue of strength and fitness and confidence in their work and people.

Obviously it’s a huge disappointment that the horse does have bad KS, and I agree the horse looks NQR in the videos. But I’ve seen with my own eyes horses that presented similarly and wound up genuinely just needing strength etc. Would I personally have been comfortable continuing without a workup if the horse were one of mine? Probably not. But it’s worked for some folks and their horses.

I don’t think anyone comes away from this transaction looking particularly good. It sucks all the way around. I think the buyer should have done more due diligence in the vetting, and I have questions about why they represented themselves as having a trainer when they didn’t. I think Jess probably shouldn’t have sold this horse to this buyer and should have tried to make sure he landed in a professional’s program. I just hope the horse rehabs from surgery well and ends up being a comfortable riding horse.

[Bogie]

@Warmblood1

I agree that sellers should not have to babysit, but don’t you think sellers have an obligation to sell sound horses? Especially when all quirks have been represented as merely behavioral?

I don’t think most flippers (or people who shop the track) do PPEs on the horses. It would simply be too expensive. Years ago I worked with someone (like Benchmark) that got some very nice horses off the track in Cleveland. The horse was sound but when I had him vetted an old injury that could have been a problem for my intended use, emerged. I’m positive the seller didn’t know. His margins were too thin to spend the $$ on the vet exams. My vet advised passing on the horse.

And if I had a dollar for every horse I’ve gone to look at that was lame, I’d be able to take myself out for a nice meal. A couple of times, I’ve looked at the trainer and/or owner and had to ask, you do know your horse is lame, right?

In the case of these videos, the horse did look better as he was ridden more. His movement still raised some flags for me, but if your business model is to keep the horses only for a few weeks, you’re not going to do a lot of x-rays.

Edited to add: at the price point that Benchmark sells horses for (which IMO is quite reasonable), I believe that it’s up to the buyer to assess their own level of risk when it comes to PPEs.

[fivestrideline]

@Bogie

And if I had a dollar for every horse I’ve gone to look at that was lame, I’d be able to take myself out for a nice meal.

Same here. SO MANY are lame/NQR on video (and I wouldn’t go look), and when I was shopping I sat on several that were certainly LAME by my standards. But since the horse was weight bearing and not head-bobbing, the sellers kept advertising as “sound” . It’s not limited to one reseller.