We are putting a horse at increased risk for injury anytime we load them on a trailer - our own or that belonging to someone else. I would just have to say that by shipping your horse you assumed any risk of injury not caused by gross negligence or deliberate actions performed by someone else. I would not consider this injury to be due to gross negligence of the shipper and because they paid for veterinary care, I would consider this to be resolved. Sometimes, shit happens with horses. This is one of those times.
[QUOTE=french fry;7811222]
Are you kidding me? I feel crazy reading the other responses on this thread.
The company was hired to get the horse from point A to point B in one piece, barring acts of god. They messed up and the horse was injured. They did not perform the service they were contracted for. I’d expect a discount. Honestly, I’d be appalled that they didn’t offer one.[/QUOTE]
It is my understanding that the horse did get from point A to point B. That was the service they agreed to provide, and they did that.
[QUOTE=Angelico;7811482]
It is my understanding that the horse did get from point A to point B. That was the service they agreed to provide, and they did that.[/QUOTE]
Did you miss where I said “in one piece”?
I stand by my original post that if a transport company fully admitted that they injured my horse due to negligence/faulty equipment on their part, I would be appalled if they didn’t offer a discount for the service they provided. I can’t imagine that a shipping company that’s stance was, “well, all we can promise is that we will get your horse from point A to point B - no guarantees about their health and safety!” would stay in business very long.
If the horse banged itself in the trailer and there wasn’t an admitted issue with the trailer, that’s another story. Shit does happen. This was not one of those times. If they had properly inspected their rig the horse would not have been injured.
They are paying for all the vet bills. They made a special stop to have her stitched up and took, presumably, good care of her. Other than that you paid to have the horse shipped. They shipped the horse. I think it’s reasonable for you to pay the agreed on price.
[QUOTE=french fry;7811526]
Did you miss where I said “in one piece”?
I stand by my original post that if a transport company fully admitted that they injured my horse due to negligence/faulty equipment on their part, I would be appalled if they didn’t offer a discount for the service they provided. I can’t imagine that a shipping company that’s stance was, “well, all we can promise is that we will get your horse from point A to point B - no guarantees about their health and safety!” would stay in business very long.
If the horse banged itself in the trailer and there wasn’t an admitted issue with the trailer, that’s another story. Shit does happen. This was not one of those times. If they had properly inspected their rig the horse would not have been injured.[/QUOTE]
Shit did happen, this is one of those times.
They did get the horse there in one piece, they stopped when she became injured and had her stitched up in order to get her there in one piece. They were paid to transport her, they did that. She is now at point B.
It’s not just that horse was hurt - it’s that horse was hurt due to their negligence. Expecting them to cover vet treatment is a no-brainer, I don’t know why some see it as such a great thing the company did - they screwed up, they got the horse hurt, they bear the cost of the trip delay and vet care.
As for client satisfaction, yes, I would expect a discount. Yes, my horse is getting to Point B, but with a 4" laceration caused not by some unavoidable “horses will be horses” accident but due to negligence. Restaurants comp meals for much less than that to keep customers happy.
Would I get into a fight about it? No. But I wouldn’t feel “satisfied” with the service, and I would likely post a review; nothing but t facts, of course.
I am in the let it go camp. Life is too short.
They fixed your horse and I assume they corrected the problem so another horse does not get injured.
If not for the accident would you have been satisfied with the service?
[QUOTE=Coanteen;7811793]
Would I get into a fight about it? No. But I wouldn’t feel “satisfied” with the service, and I would likely post a review; nothing but t facts, of course.[/QUOTE]
This, exactly.
I would’ve expected a discount. I am really surprised by the responses here. A 4 inch long gash requiring stitches is not just a bit of fur rubbed out. The owner will presumably be responsible for continuing to treat the horse, possibly follow-up vet care, administering antibiotics, and possibly not using the horse for its intended purpose while the injury is healing. None of that is covered by just paying the vet bill.
I’m impressed they just took care of everything no questions asked. Most companies you have to sue to correct issues.
Accidents happen. I’m in business and you would be a customer that I would hope to avoid. If they don’t get paid they can’t afford to pay the vet to fix up your horse.
I did some work in a home and snagged the carpet. I had someone come in and fix the carpet. That is what you do. I would not give a discount on the work I did as it has nothing to do with the damage i accidently caused.
There was an acknowledged error on their part that resulted in an injury to your horse- this does not fall directly into the unavoidable s*%t happens when dealing with horses category. I would expect and ask for a discount but not make a big deal about it when they said no. Have they agreed to pay for the follow up vet care or just the initial care during the trip? That I absolutely would make a big deal about if they are not paying for.
[QUOTE=China Doll;7813572]
I’m in business and you would be a customer that I would hope to avoid. [/QUOTE]
If your business was in the habit of not inspecting its equipment properly before using it in its work, you would be the kind of contractor I’d hope to avoid.
Still unsure if people are reading this fully. OP stated that the van company actually admitted not inspecting the transport it stuck her horse on, and this led to the injury. That is not an “accident.”
[QUOTE=Coanteen;7813747]
If your business was in the habit of not inspecting its equipment properly before using it in its work, you would be the kind of contractor I’d hope to avoid.
Still unsure if people are reading this fully. OP stated that the van company actually admitted not inspecting the transport it stuck her horse on, and this led to the injury. That is not an “accident.”[/QUOTE]
I still see it as an accident. Curious to know what exactly was the problem that caused the cut. Horses damage trailers all the time and I can see how something could be missed. We are all only human and mistakes happen, and horses have a way of finding things to hurt themselves on!
[QUOTE=Coanteen;7813747]
If your business was in the habit of not inspecting its equipment properly before using it in its work, you would be the kind of contractor I’d hope to avoid.
Still unsure if people are reading this fully. OP stated that the van company actually admitted not inspecting the transport it stuck her horse on, and this led to the injury. That is not an “accident.”[/QUOTE] well there really wasn’t enough information given on to what it was that caused the damage or how obvious it was. Horses get injured in very safe places. The horse did not have permanent injury or loss of use which is the important part.
I’m pretty surprised that people think the OP should drop it. The company has to be trusted to provide safe transit for your horse. They loaded it on a trailer with a problem and it got hurt. They did the right thing and took care of it, but that’s not the advertised service. Did you lose riding time because of the injury? If so they definitely owe you, but a reputable company would give a discount for subpar performance
I am surprised the company did not offer a discount. I am not sure I think they should have to offer one but I am simply surprised they did not.
[QUOTE=tmo0hul;7810520]
I get that analogy and I have been going back and forth. However let’s switch away for horses and go to the rest of the world… If you bought a brand new car from a distant dealership and it was damaged in transit, would you still expect to pay full price even through the damage could be fixed at no cost to you?[/QUOTE]
I can answer this analogy. No.
I bought a brand new car. The next morning, the day I was supposed to pick up the new car, I get a call from the dealership that a bunch of cars on the lot had been vandalized on their lot, with rocks. One of those cars was mine.
I was offered two things, free rental while they fixed my car or the ability to back out of the signed contract. No offer of a reduced price.
I’m having trouble getting past the shipping of a horse without a signed contract part… from both parties.
Where would you all be if something had gone REALLY wrong?
Bad, really very bad, idea for everyone involved.
I run a business and we don’t do anything for anyone without signed contracts with clearly indicated terms and conditions that cover all this kind of crap. Makes life so much simpler in the long run.
[QUOTE=tmo0hul;7810520]
I get that analogy and I have been going back and forth. However let’s switch away for horses and go to the rest of the world… If you bought a brand new car from a distant dealership and it was damaged in transit, would you still expect to pay full price even through the damage could be fixed at no cost to you?
I would be with you on the boarding page analogy if it was something that she could have avoided. However she was placed into a situation where she was going to be injured. Should we pay full price for negligent service?
Honestly, I posted because I see it from both sides and am looking for opinions. Thanks.[/QUOTE]
I suspect many an item is damaged in transit repaired and the buyer never knows so there is no discount. I don’t see why you would expect a discount on top of all costs being covered including follow up care. I think that’s both appropriate and excellent service.
I’d just be thankful that they stopped to get the horse fixed on the way.
I think they did their due diligence with fixing the horse & paying for all of that. What else do you want money for? Pain & suffering? The law considers animals as property, so you can’t get pain & suffering (in most states) for injuries to them.
Go read some horror stories on people who unload their horses from “professional” haulers with flaps of skin hanging off or massively lame animals or severely dehydrated ones.
I have to agree with Coateen - the injury was not because “horses are horses” but because the company was negligent in the inspection/care of the trailer. And they knew it.
I would have expected a discount on top of the medical bills covered.