Lease contract ... is this part normal?

[HuntrJumpr]

I spoke with an insurance company about a lease horse once recently and they actually recommended something along this time - I did not double check it with a lawyer or really ponder the potential implications too much, but this company said that they had many clients who required leasees to a.) hold insurance, b.) pay a percentage of the horse’s value if it is permanently/irreversibly injured outside of accident, and c.) pay a certain amount (not full cost of lease or full cost of any ongoing vet bills) per month if the horse is out of commission for an injury that isn’t an accident. Obviously there are things I outlined there that would need to be reworded into legal-ese and there are some fuzzy definitions around “accident” but apparently its been done.

And as an owner, I’d be all for it. If my horse is injured because… I don’t know, say the leasees don’t get the horse fit before expecting it to jump around because they figure -most- of the time a horse will be just fine for a few jumps even if it is unfit, and the leased horse pulls something… That is their fault, and in my opinion, they should be responsible.

[Kryswyn]

So if the lessee knows they’ll be responsible forever because the horse will never be sound again, does this mean they can choose to have the horse PTS? I mean, he may not belong to them, but if you’re going to keep them on the hook for vet costs after the lease, then they could argue that they don’t feel that keeping the horse as a pasture puff is fair quality of life and decide he’s better off dead.

It just seems to me, that if I were the lessee, and you were asking me to sign ‘medical bills to be paid until horse is in same condition as start of lease’ I’d insert 2 clauses. 1) that if the horse will never be usable at the same level, I’d want the option to buy at new FMV, and 2) I’d add a clause that if lessor’s horse injures ME, that lessor will be responsible for my medical expenses until I’m sound again.

[gottagrey]

I had somewhat of a free lease on my horse a couple of summers ago. The BM/Bo gave me a contract to sign which would release her of any responsibility/liability if my horse caused injury to the jr. rider. Well I read that darn contract and realized I would be holding the bag for everything HUH. Why should I as owner be responsible for medical /vet bills which might have occurred while horse was away at a show? And I mean more along the lines of injury sustained while being handled as opposed to ridden.For example - my horse doesn’t behave on trailer when he’s alone… if they leave him alone, he freaks and hurts himself - that’s not going to be my financial problem.

The owner/lessor in this case is apparently educated on such matters and probably realizes and understands the difference between an injury sustained out in the field vs an injury by being somewhat careless (negligent).

After reading this thread if I found myself in a similar situation again, I think I would also add that any additional fees resulting from injury would also be the responsibility of the lessee… meaning if a barn charges for hand walking, bandages, more for stall rest etc… I wouldn’t want to be left holding the financial bag for an injury caused by someone else.

So say lessee is texting her friends while riding Rocky in a field… she’s all excited about party so paying more attention to texts than where she’s riding… Rocky takes a mistep and manages to cut himself and find out later he might have pulled something… Now there’s a vet bill for stitches, bandages & wound care by barn staff, ultrasounds and fees for stall rest & handwalking…Should the owner take over those expenses in 2 months? or should the lessee be responsible for them unless he’s back to work? I think the latter. And just because he has insurance doesn’t mean a person would want to file a claim. too many claims - exclusions or cancellation.

[Rel6]

As someone who has leased 8 horses in her junior career, I would NEVER sign it. What happens if a few months into your lease you find out that the horse has arthritis? Sure its supposed to be caught by a vet, but my friend bought a horse that passed the vet (xrays and everything) and a few months later was lame. Are you then expected to pay for everything that has to do with the horses’s arthritis for the rest of its life?

Also, and I know the OP isn’t doing this, but someone else selling a horse with that clause might know that this horse has a chronic condition. So then the leasee is cheated into paying expenses for a pre-existing condition, because they didn’t know it was a pre-existing condition.

Sorry, but no. I would not touch that clause with a ten foot pole.

[Sunset_Ponies]

As someone who leases out my ponies and I wouldn’t sign this kind of contract. I realize that part of leasing ponies instead of selling them is that I am ultimately responsible for the pony after the lease is up. It is actually why I choose to lease some of my ponies. If they come to the end of their career, I want to be the one that takes care of them in their retirement.

That being said, my contract has lots of stipulations about what can and can’t be done with the pony while it is on lease and I do lots of background checks before they are leased. I also check in on them regularly to make sure those stipulations are being followed. The leasee is responsible for everything during the lease, but nothing after the fact. That is why many people choose to lease.

[Jaideux]

Another reason I don’t like this idea of the leasee being on the hook for medical costs after the end of the lease:

If I were the leasee, and I was on the hook, I would want to know that the owner is doing the aftercare BY THE BOOK. And we all know that THE BOOK (which doesn’t exist) has several editions, some of which we all own and some of which only the cactuswhacked own.

Imagine this scenario: I’m leasing a horse who comes up lame the last week of my lease. The owner takes it back and keeps it stall-bound until sound again. The horse in turns freaks out from being on so much turn-in and prolongs the healing. Am I still on the hook?

Or, what about the part where I and the vet believe the horse would recover better and faster on light, quiet turnout, but the owner disagrees and opts for total stall rest? Am I still on the hook?

What if the owner of this lame horse opts for an experimental surgery to fix the lameness and I definitely think it’s just a sprain that the horse will recover from with a traditional cold hose/wrap routine? Am I still on the hook?

I think it just makes the most sense to require a leasee to take out an insurance policy for an agreed upon value that names the owner as the benefactor, and just select a carrier that will honor medical costs beyond the end of the lease.

Or, better yet, (if this is even possible) just include the cost of the insurance in the lease fee so you never have to worry about policies lapsing, etc. If a claim needs to be made, you should be the first or second call the leasee makes, anyway, so it’s not like they could or should be keeping it a secret, anyway, right?

[HenryisBlaisin]

I think it depends on the injury and its cause. If the horse slips in the paddock and injures a suspensory, then perhaps bills should end with the lease. Horse develops something like Cushings, then that’s a no-brainer-of course the owner reassumes the bills when the lease ends

But if the lessee is at fault for the injury (paddock is muddy and slippery and horse is turned out anyway; horse steps in a hole on a trail ride, horse founders because lessee left the feed bin unlocked) then the lessee should be responsible for the entire bill, no way the owner should be tagged with that, no matter when the lease ends.

If you rent a car and wreck it, you are responsible for the entire repair, even if the repair is performed a week after you return the car. Why should that be different if the lessee is at fault with a horse they don’t own?

When I leased out my horse, the lease specifically stated that the lessee was responsible for any and all vet bills incurred from any injury caused by a lack of due diligence. As owner, I was responsible for things like colic surgery (provided colic wasn’t due to any negligence on her part).

[HorseTrainerUsedCarS]

Old post but still relevant topic - hope someone is still listening: what if you have full lease on horse then horse comes up with a deep flexor tendon injury when you know you have been riding very lightly but was found the day after you walked in to find another boarder at this owner/trainer/lessor barn and no one asked you of someone else could ride your $$leased horse - now horse is unsound, unuseful and the owner/trainer/lessor is unilaterally deciding that serial shock wave therapy is “necessary” and insisting you pay the vet bills ($$$) - only 5 months into lease with the horse unsound last 2. Lessor threatens to hold you responsible for “breach” when you question “necessity” of SWT or its proven efficacy and says “oh you knew” when you ask why other people are riding your lease horse although also remembers saying no to offer to share horse for riding in exchange to help with board expense.

[Scribbler]

@HorseTrainerUsedCarSalesmanAllTheSame

Old post but still relevant topic - hope someone is still listening: what if you have full lease on horse then horse comes up with a deep flexor tendon injury when you know you have been riding very lightly but was found the day after you walked in to find another boarder at this owner/trainer/lessor barn and no one asked you of someone else could ride your $$leased horse - now horse is unsound, unuseful and the owner/trainer/lessor is unilaterally deciding that serial shock wave therapy is “necessary” and insisting you pay the vet bills ($$$) - only 5 months into lease with the horse unsound last 2. Lessor threatens to hold you responsible for “breach” when you question “necessity” of SWT or its proven efficacy and says “oh you knew” when you ask why other people are riding your lease horse although also remembers saying no to offer to share horse for riding in exchange to help with board expense.

Is this a hypothetical question or do you want specific feedback on this situation?

If the latter, perhaps start a new thread. And perhaps make your story a little clearer and use standard sentence structure. I think I get what happened but the way it is written is very confusing.

[vxf111]

@HorseTrainerUsedCarSalesmanAllTheSame

Old post but still relevant topic - hope someone is still listening: what if you have full lease on horse then horse comes up with a deep flexor tendon injury when you know you have been riding very lightly but was found the day after you walked in to find another boarder at this owner/trainer/lessor barn and no one asked you of someone else could ride your $$leased horse - now horse is unsound, unuseful and the owner/trainer/lessor is unilaterally deciding that serial shock wave therapy is “necessary” and insisting you pay the vet bills ($$$) - only 5 months into lease with the horse unsound last 2. Lessor threatens to hold you responsible for “breach” when you question “necessity” of SWT or its proven efficacy and says “oh you knew” when you ask why other people are riding your lease horse although also remembers saying no to offer to share horse for riding in exchange to help with board expense.

You comply with the terms of your lease vis a vis the owner and go after the person riding the horse without permission for contribution because they actually caused the injury (assuming that is factually what happened, your post is a bit unclear).

[findeight]

You comply with the terms of the lease you signed. You agreed to accept all responsibility. Owner has the right to make vet decisions on serious injuries unless your contract language says otherwise.

Unauthorized person riding your leased horse is a seperate issue you can address with whoever is supposed to be minding the barn but dont see how you are going to prove they caused the injury…all it takes is one bad step. If it’s turned out, could have happened there. You’d have to prove their actions were a direct cause of the injury to go after them for thousands in vet bills.

Id be pissed somebody else was riding my horse but that’s between you and whoever is supposed to be in charge of the barn, and, again, you really don’t know what happened. Afraid you are stuck with it.

[SonnysMom]

@vxf111

You comply with the terms of your lease vis a vis the owner and go after the person riding the horse without permission for contribution because they actually caused the injury (assuming that is factually what happened, your post is a bit unclear).

The second scenario is a bit unclear to me but it sounds like the owner/trainer/leassor is the same person. It sounds like they full leased the horse to OP but was also letting/charging other people to ride the horse even though the horse was on full lease. It sounds like they asked OP if they could use the horse for other people in exchange for a lower board fee but OP said no. Owner/trainer did it anyway and when OP asked about why somebody else was riding the horse they basically said she knew why since they asked about it but conveniently forgot she said no.
It sounds ugly all around.

[vxf111]

@SonnysMom

The second scenario is a bit unclear to me but it sounds like the owner/trainer/leassor is the same person. It sounds like they full leased the horse to OP but was also letting/charging other people to ride the horse even though the horse was on full lease. It sounds like they asked OP if they could use the horse for other people in exchange for a lower board fee but OP said no. Owner/trainer did it anyway and when OP asked about why somebody else was riding the horse they basically said she knew why since they asked about it but conveniently forgot she said no.
It sounds ugly all around.

Oh I did not read it that way. Sometimes she uses the term “owner/trainer/lessor” and sometimes just “lessor” so I didn’t read it how you did. You might be right and it would change things if the lessor is the one who authorize the horse being used by another rider and that during the ride was when an injury occurred. Because then arguably the lessor is in breach. HTUC can you clarify?

[LovesHorses]

This is standard with Hunter/Jumpers. “Horse to be returned in the same sound condition.” That’s the risk you take with leasing my nice horse. You should do a full vet check before starting the lease.

[phippsie62]

I’m just an amateur owner with only the experience of owning one h/j horse, so keep that in mind as I comment: After reading the OP’s original description of the situation, and then all the opinions following, I’m now convinced that I’d never be either a lessor or a lessee.

Too much risk added to the already risky business of dealing with sport horses. Some posters have offered very smart safeguards in specifying protective insurance strategies. However, I’m not an attorney, and the barn folk I know (trainers, barn owners, clients) are far less competent even than I when it comes to writing contracts–or even modifying a boilerplate agreement.

Accidents happen: My one h/j horse, then for sale at 30K, pulled a suspensory while playing with another gelding across a paddock fence. The barn was closed that day, I wasn’t there, and the barn staff on hand did nothing to halt a dangerous situation. Consequently, my 30K horse–with potential buyers lined up to try him–became essentially worthless to the market.

Supposing I was either the lessor or a lessee in such a situation, I can imagine how terrible both parties would feel. And the h/j world is small. What if the lessor went around saying “She broke my horse”? And what if the lessee is like me–feeling awful and responsible, even if the accident wasn’t my fault?

No, no, no. I’d much rather take full responsibility for my own horse, and then if something goes wrong, I’ll have only myself to blame, if there’s any blame to be laid anywhere. I might miss out on the opportunity to ride a better equine athlete than I’ll ever be able to afford, but so be it.

[right_horse_at_the_right_time]

Nope. When the owner/trainer decided to let someone else part-lease/ride the horse, he/she broke the contract and now has to deal with consequences. Hire equine lawyer ASAP. Don’t even go there with medical necessity-lease was breached and you are not responsible for any of the fees.

Not a lawyer, but had a similar potential situation and addressed it ahead of time with 3 equine lawyers who all said the same thing. Owner breached.

[Current_Options]

This is ridiculous. No one would agree to it.
owners retain all decision making, vet, and farrier costs.
Also who decides on these medical arrangements? What power does the leasee get to dictate what therapies are chosen?
I guess a lot has changed .I have leased 10-15 hoses and the point of leasing was to not have this commitment.
Also the person who pays get a the power so IF lease person pays then they dictate how it goes. Otherwise the owner could spend spend spend since its not their dime.
good luck proving fault here.

However yes there should be a clause for willfully injuring the horse.

[woops]

We add a provision in the lease that requires the insurance will
extend 30 days beyond the lease. Too many times horse returned not so good.

[meupatdoes]

@woops

We add a provision in the lease that requires the insurance will
extend 30 days beyond the lease. Too many times horse returned not so good.

That’s a very good idea.

I recently had a horse come off a lease requiring nearly a year of stall rest and rehab. They used him til he broke and then tossed him back to me to put humpty dumpty together again. Medical costs were not extravagant but the months upon months of stall rest and rehab sure was!!

Now I think a “sound return” clause is a great idea. When the horse is leased, an additional $5k deposit goes on the lease. If the horse is returned ready to step in the ring and get a ribbon, lessee gets the money back. If not, owner has some help with the uninsurable expenses, but lessee has not made a lifetime commitment.

Of course, even this will be too much responsibility for some lessees, who will balk at the idea of taking ANY responsibility for a leased horse whatsoever. The whole point of leasing to them is to be able to ride a horse way nicer than they could buy or train up themselves and throw it back scot free if they break it.

[Atlas_Shrugged]

The insurance should be exhausted before lessee has to pay- then it is not unreasonable to ask for additions uninsured expenses during or even after the lease ends - Another thought is to charge much more for the lease fee and absorb the after-lease med expenses by lessor.