GREAT reply!
The owner had the horse previously in her backyard, alone. She could swing that again but is an obviously terrible life for a herd animal. Horse would obviously get less care in this situation. My friend is aware of this unfortunate life for this horse.
Thank you for your suggestions on how to convince the owner to relinquish the horse to a better home.
If the BOs take her legally, she’d likely go to a rescue, not an auction. They know the horse and want it to go to a good home.
It’s their preference to not involve lawyer at THIS point. They opt to try to convince the owner to relinquish the horse, which will be more of a point on March 1. Sure @Displaced_Yankee, I get your point. But the BOs want the best for this horse. This horse lives with their personal horses. Their professional jobs support the barn and they care about the horses on their property. I admire that because they can afford to take this stance to a point. Most BOs couldn’t. And they really care about the horses on their property because they are very great people and really care about the horses on their property.
Sure, not everyone is in this situation but it would be great if the advice moving forward is geared towards this situation.
I know this isn’t what they want to hear, but it sounds like this owner is really taking advantage of the situation and they are enabling her (out of the kindness of their hearts, not out of any ill will) to keep a horse she either cannot afford or will not take care of.
She knows they aren’t kicking her out and won’t do a lien so there she will stay.
It may not be up to them. It may be up to a judge if they have to legally seize it, as it were.
Put that in front of the owner as well. Relinquishing keeps the horse out of the judicial system.
A judge may not be able to act out of compassion for the horse. A judge may be required by law to send the horse to the livestock auction. Can even mention that this is where kill buyers pick up horses and they like a well-fleshed animal because it brings more at the slaughter house than a skinny one.
That’s harsh … but done in a compassionate way that prioritizes the horse’s best interests, and added to her ongoing neglect of hooves, vaccinations, etc. … this might get her to sign the horse over.
Plus this way she no longer has any financial or other responsibility. Many problems solved, horse is in the best possible place.
The tone and approach is that this is already happening, not that the BO’s are making a decision about it.
All evaluated by what the BO’s think is right for their own best interests, of course.
I know. I don’t fault the BO for thinking of the horse first. Admirable really.
But just because they CAN support Dobbin does not mean that they are obligated to for free. I agree with @Impractical_Horsewoman that the BO is being taken advantage of.
I’ll bow out of the conversation now…I really hope your friend and the horse find a good resolution!
I am sorry to say that I occasionally meet people like this in my job (the HO). And they seem like very nice people to talk to – it’s part of how they operate.
Did this HO ever pay board? Did she make regular payments? If the answer is that it was a problem starting from 2-3 months in, she is probably in this camp. Even if she has made partial payments – if it has been mostly partial payments and rarely or never a full payment, the BO’s have a serious case on their hands.
If she was making regular payments since she moved in for a year or two, it may be that she now has some exceptional life problems that are hopefully temporary. But if she isn’t staying in touch that’s not a good sign.
I have no idea if this HO is like these other people, so these are general remarks. There are people who will never, ever pay for everything they do, everything they consume. They leave their bills with others. They pay nothing for what they do and consume, for where they live, unless they are forced to pay, unless the consequences (including legal) are too unpleasant for them.
BUT – they have a much higher tolerance to what most of us would consider ‘unacceptable’. I had one explain to me that the utility company had finally switched off the unpaid electricity and water. But no big deal, they would run to the convenience store for containers of water for flushing the toilet and standing shower-baths, etc. Already had various camping lights in the house.
Until they could talk a church, a charity, a gov’t social assistance program, a kind friend or someone into paying up the utilities and getting things turned back on. Their school-aged kids were very familiar with this routine.
They can live with dunning letters and phone calls, eviction notices and more. It’s just paper to them.
Owning a horse is the same. If they want a horse, they’ll buy one. Or more. They’ll figure things out as they go. Or not, the last ones I knew turned their starving horses over to a rescue after being reported by their neighbors.
And btw, this situation has nothing to do with race, gender, even apparent economic strata , any of the labels. It’s just a characteristic of humanity and has been noted since the beginning of human civilization. I’ve encountered it in a broad range of humans.
Well, won’t go on. No idea if this HO is in this camp. But if she is, nothing on earth will get her to pay a dime or move the horse or provide basic care as long as these BO’s give him a home. And she will consider him hers with intentions to exercise full rights over him – at her convenience. If she is this type of person.
But even if she’s this type, there is a chance – maybe a good one – that she’ll relinquish the horse IF she sees it as a positive to herself. She won’t care about consequences to the horse. She will care about removing a problem from her life at no cost to her. The trick is to get her to see the horse as a problem. Right now it’s a free benefit. IF she’s the kind of person I’m describing.
Might I add a small point that could be useful in discussing turning the horse over to the BO’s? If something were to happen to the horse (colic, big gash in a major muscle etc) the BO would not be able to authorize vet care without the express permission of the owner, who would need to have a form of payment arranged in advance with the vet. At least that’s how it works around here (maybe not where horse resides). As a barn owner I have to be sure that horse owners have a vet identified, form of payment arranged and have given the vets office written permission for me and/or other identified people to authorize care if owner can’t be reached. This could cover vaccinations and deworming as well as be a lever to help persuade the current HO.
Best of luck to the barn owners who are trying to work this out, and thanks to all for the education.
The options given to the HO need to be presented as her only choices, or the BO’s move forward legally. No negotiating or hoping that she will cooperate. If she tries to evade or weep or remonstrate, it doesn’t matter, these are still the choices. Communications with her need to stick to those choices, avoid all other conversation. Don’t be led away from these choices if she starts giving sad stories even if they are true.
The BO’s must move forward in their process from one step to the next like a machine, without wavering. Regardless of what HO says or does.
At this point I think the BO’s should offer only these choices:
Including a firm date by which the choice must be a) made and b) executed.
If she says she will pay and move the horse, but doesn’t pay, that’s the same as doing nothing and the BO’s move forward with the legal steps. Etc. So important that the BO’s stay on track with every step. It’s not fun, but the sooner they get through it, the sooner it’s over & everyone moves on.
I wonder if there is an option for the BO’s to turn the horse over to a rescue and avoid auction if they do take ownership through legal action?
No option should be offered for the horse to stay at the BO’s farm under HO’s ownership. If she pays the board bill in full she still has to move the horse. Do whatever can be done to ensure this outcome – the BO’s can even offer to move the horse themselves. Including written notice that if she is again behind on the bill by a full month (or two months), the owners will legally start the process to claim the horse. And will be very prompt about taking this action.
Otherwise there will be another round of this at a future date. This HO needs not to be part of their barn life any longer. 
Yep, it sounds like a similar situation. In terms of bins of horses. the trainer out of the barn has the most amount of horses, and I think the BOs have as many boarders as they have horses. Four. The BOs are very flexible, like you. The other boarders are reliable and often very helpful, it’s just this one boarder.
Thanks for your insight!
Apparently this owner did make payments but is still delinquent. Apparently, she just gave birth and no one expects that her horse behavior will change with a newborn.
She could easily move the horse to her backyard, to be alone and get less care than the horse is getting now. Again, the BOs hope is that a better situation for the horse, if possible, can be achieved. I’m rather in awe of my friend to be thinking of what’s best for the horse. legally.
Thank you! The BOs are lurking (not members of the board).
Again, I realize they are trying to be kind, but the owner obviously knows this, and is holding the BO hostage with the leverage, “I will take the horse and give him worse care if you evict, not do basic care if you don’t, but pay just enough to make you feel guilty,” I hate to use self-help language, but I do think there is some enabling going on.
There’s a farm around here that has a penalty clause for owners who don’t show up. They have it on a time frame, I think weekly? $20 if you don’t come see your horse every week. They also have a termination clause if the owner is persistent on being an “absentee owner”.
I understand your friend wants what’s best for the horse, but they need to carefully balance business and the heart-strings. 1) you can’t save them all and 2) this is likely to happen again in the future, and you don’t want to be hemming and hawwing every time you’re owed money. There should be a procedure in place.
If the owner doesn’t want to sell, then she can figure out how to pay in a timely manner. Those are the only two options.
Enabling a person to keep a horse who does not or cannot get the horse trimmed and vaccinated is ultimately not a kindness in the end.
I know your friends have experience in business, but I think this is where horse and other types of businesses differ–it’s one thing to give a good tenant a break on apartment rent who is going through a hard time, or to offer a discount to someone because you are sympathetic to them, but this is hurting the horse.
I’m trying to figure out why this thread was even started at all. Seems like the barn owner is perfectly fine with the horse living there for free. Also BO is still “neglecting” the horse by not getting its feet trimmed or routine vet care/shots/worming so why do you think the horse is getting better care with BO instead of at HO’s house?
I wouldn’t be so adversarial.
However, the owner may be able to afford vet and farrier if they don’t owe board.
Also while – of course!! – it isn’t ideal, a horse living alone isn’t the worst thing in the world, especially with a loving owner. Maybe they’ll get a goat for company. Maybe they won’t, but it’s not a horrifying situation. This horse is not owned by the BO, I really think since the owner has an option where everyone’s needs can be met (although not met ideally) that’s what should happen.
Personally, I would not evict a horse, if I knew it meant immediately being put down or sent to auction. I would evict a horse that had an ok, though imperfect, landing.
With the usual caveat that we can’t know every fact or nuance of the BO’s situation. I am a BO myself.
I really don’t think it’s fair to imply that BOs who actually sticks to their contracts and run their business like a business aren’t compassionate and don’t care about the animals.
Having been both a boarder and a BO, I never understood how BO’s let situations like this go on for so long. People say they’re too scared of “what will happen to the horse??” if they kick the owner out. But somehow it’s better that the owner is being allowed to neglect the health of their horse for years with no repercussions? You’re not helping a horse by allowing neglect just because it’s being neglected under your supervision.
Boarding contacts and late fees exist for a reason. If you don’t adhere to them with every single boarder, there’s no point having boarding contracts.
Agister’s liens exist for a reason. This BO should have started that process as soon as the HO stopped paying board, if not before depending on if their contract mandates staying up to date on vaccinations.
Or give the horse owner a date to have their horse out.
People who are out to take advantage of other people will use horses, pets, children, anything the other party has a heart for, as emotional manipulation and leverage. It is powerful and often works. Sometimes indefinitely.
Basically, they speak as if the responsibility is on the other party, the party they owe. If you make me pay rent then I can’t feed my children. If you don’t take care of my horse he’ll end up at auction or in a bad place.
This is the hardest part of managing a boarding barn. You must distance yourself emotionally. Or you will end up with the responsibility and the bill for someone else’s horse.
They have to move on with their problems. You have to move on, too, with your own problems that don’t include them.
Otherwise the burden of their problems is being shifted to you. The weight of their problems only gets worse with time.
A barn manager friend gave notice to an intractable boarder to move her horse within 30 days. The boarder answered that if she was forced to move the horse she would just put him down. My friend said “do what you must do”. In the end, the boarder moved, and did not put the horse down.
What becomes of the horse is not the BO’s responsibility. They have to step away and put blinders on. Or, just go ahead and accept responsibility for the horse, knowing that the owner can swoop in at any moment and take the horse away for herself, having never paid them what she owes.
If she is stringing them along with partial payments, this hole will get deeper and deeper and deeper.
If this is what the situation is, the barn owners have to make a decision that is very hard, no matter what they decide. Or don’t decide — not making a decision is also a decision.
This. I think this puts into words why this thread is annoying me so much. Even the barn owners in this thread who have made allowances for boarders at times have said with all the facts in this case, enough is enough.
The boarder hasn’t even had the decency to speak to the barn owners in person to work something out.
I too am getting confused about why this thread was started. The barn owners don’t want to take legal action. They love this horse and feel compassionate towards it, enough to waive board to keep it on-premises, but presumably not enough to donate basic vet and farrier care. Yet they are afraid what will happen if the owner takes the horse home because the horse will be lonely. So the unvaccinated, untrimmed horse is sitting in a field of vaccinated, shod, paying boarders who must be getting pissed off that they are paying and this other person is not. This doesn’t seem compassionate but enabling. What if this horse gets sick? What then?
This is where COTH threads are useful. We all bounce an idea around and the OP can then evaluate approaches and see what works, what’s accepted practice, etc. It’s often very useful, they don’t need to follow anyone bit of advice but it helps get people unstuck from a situation.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
