Question about sales etiquette

[McGurk]

I guess this comes down to a question of what’s the right thing to do as opposed to what you’re obligated to do.

If the pro in question had the horse in the barn for 6 weeks and the sales activity was answering questions about an ad placed somewhere, then I think nothing more than “Thanks for your effort, we’ve decided not to sell.” The pro will continue to make make money off of your continued training board.

If, however, the pro in question does have some time and effort in the sales effort - worked on getting decent sales video and photos, wrote the ad, has been actively showing the horse to buyers, maybe hauled it off site to show to buyers, the type of activity that’s normally compensated by the commission, then I think the correct thing to do would be offer them some compensation, something short of the full commission. I would especially take this approach if you wanted to continue to work with this pro.

Again, the horse didn’t fail to sell and generate a commission because of a failure of effort on the pro’s part; the horse’s owners decided to take the horse off the market.

And yes, a contract that spelled out exactly what would happen in this situation would be a good idea.

[Alternate1999]

Thank you for all your replies! I basically agree with all of you. Black and white, trainer is SOL because of the lack of any contract. Me personally I would work out some sort of compensation because she did do the work and ‘we’ were the ones who pulled out of the ‘contract’.

I’ll try to get to all of your questions I apologize if I miss any!

It was just a loose verbal agreement, I was surprised there was nothing in writing, this is nowhere near trainers first sale so I was surprised they were doing this on a kind of good faith verbal agreement.

Trainer was being paid for training board, compensation for if the horse didn’t sell was not discussed, owners were not given a timeline nor was a timeline on selling the horse discussed, trainer was consulted on sales price and after about a month they reconvened and lowered the price, they were not happy with the offers they were given so they decided to keep the horse instead. Trainer did have quite a lot of time and effort in marketing the horse; 2 nice videos were made and nice professional photos taken. I know trainer fielded a lot of interest in the horse and showed the horse to a lot of people. I told them both that I see both their sides and I understand both their points but have made it clear it is between them and they have respected that thankfully instead of putting me between a rock and a hard place!

[OverandOnward]

Thanks for the clarifying info!

Real estate agents, and professional investors who are not agents, walk around with blank contracts in their bag or car.

Working out details by talking through the contract not only covers all the bases, it also reminds everyone of which bases to cover. It’s a checklist, as well as an agreement.

Contracts are also reminders later on of what was discussed and agreed. You don’t want to be well along in the deal and having people with ‘faulty’ memories that they insist are accurate.

That’s why I asked if the trainer and owner agreed on what was discussed at the beginning. It would be par for the course if one party says ‘yes we did discuss it and agree’ and the other says they didn’t.

These convivial deal-starter discussions so easily lead everyone to believe that we’re all on the same page, lots of goodwill to go around, etc. But that doesn’t last after that talk is over and everyone is moving forward with their own personal agendas.

[Eclectic_Horseman]

@Alternate1999

It was just a loose verbal agreement, I was surprised there was nothing in writing, this is nowhere near trainers first sale so I was surprised they were doing this on a kind of good faith verbal agreement.

Perhaps the trainer was never burned like this before. Once someone has decided to sell, it’s not a very usual thing that they simply change their minds. I bet she’ll have a contract next time!

It sounds as though the trainer did put quite a bit of work into selling the horse. The warning here is that if the seller subsequently decides to sell the horse to a buyer that came about as the result of the trainer’s efforts (showing the horse for sale, ads, etc.) then the trainer would have a decent legal case against the seller for cheating her out of the commission. In that case, the damages would be the whole commission, not just compensation for her sales efforts.

[sixteenhands]

@OverandOnward

Where is that idea from? No, if the owner pulls the house from the market, they don’t owe anything.

Real estate contracts usually have a commission protection period.

[Eclectic_Horseman]

@sixteenhands

Real estate contracts usually have a commission protection period.

I have also seen brokers sue successfully when the seller makes a sale after the contract period, but sells to a buyer that was produced by the broker’s efforts. In other words, the seller can’t just wait until after the contract expires to cheat the broker out of their commission.

[Alternate1999]

Update: Owners thought it over and decided to compensate trainer for time/efforts selling the horse so thankfully there will be no bad blood. And trainer is definitely doing contracts with everything going forward.

Thank you again for all your insights!

[endlessclimb]

A happy ending for all. Good!

[Impractical_Horsewoman]

That’s fantastic to hear for all parties, a rare COTH happy ending!

I’m also glad the trainer is protecting herself–and also future sellers who will know just how much they will owe in compensation beforehand.

[Jarpur]

Glad that it all worked out, in the end.

I’m a bit surprised that an experienced trainer had never had someone change their mind about selling a horse before – especially if the owners are disappointed by the offers.

[OverandOnward]

Very happy to hear that the owners will treat the trainer fairly on this. That’s a relief, I’m sure!

Trainer might want to consider outlining the agreement terms they want in a transaction of this sort, and paying an attorney to draft it up into a blank contract, with all the clauses and protections that us civilians don’t know that we need. And/or, search for similar contracts on the internet, as there are probably some out there. Hopefully there is never a problem that the contract needs to back up. But if there is, the effort and possibly monetary sums put into preparing a solid contract might well pay for themselves.

@Eclectic_Horseman

The warning here is that if the seller subsequently decides to sell the horse to a buyer that came about as the result of the trainer’s efforts (showing the horse for sale, ads, etc.) then the trainer would have a decent legal case against the seller for cheating her out of the commission. In that case, the damages would be the whole commission, not just compensation for her sales efforts.

This scenario also highlights the most fundamental damage that is intended to be protected by contracts: relationship damage.

No one wants the fallout if the whole thing ends up in a mess like that. How significant the owner’s business is to the trainer, and how significant the owner’s reputation and opinion is in the trainer’s horse world, are serious concerns to any trainer.

It is very unfortunate that some people do not respect the role and work of an agent, and will actively seek to cheat them out of their commission. Such as, pulling an item from the agent’s representation, and then selling it to a buyer who did find it through the agent’s marketing, just to deny paying commission to the agent. Sellers who will do this are too frequent, and it can be surprising and disappointing to find out who thinks it is ok to deal like this.

[Scribbler]

@Alternate1999

Thank you for all your replies! I basically agree with all of you. Black and white, trainer is SOL because of the lack of any contract. Me personally I would work out some sort of compensation because she did do the work and ‘we’ were the ones who pulled out of the ‘contract’.

I’ll try to get to all of your questions I apologize if I miss any!

It was just a loose verbal agreement, I was surprised there was nothing in writing, this is nowhere near trainers first sale so I was surprised they were doing this on a kind of good faith verbal agreement.

Trainer was being paid for training board, compensation for if the horse didn’t sell was not discussed, owners were not given a timeline nor was a timeline on selling the horse discussed, trainer was consulted on sales price and after about a month they reconvened and lowered the price, they were not happy with the offers they were given so they decided to keep the horse instead. Trainer did have quite a lot of time and effort in marketing the horse; 2 nice videos were made and nice professional photos taken. I know trainer fielded a lot of interest in the horse and showed the horse to a lot of people. I told them both that I see both their sides and I understand both their points but have made it clear it is between them and they have respected that thankfully instead of putting me between a rock and a hard place!

Hmm. If there were potential buyers, queries, trial rides, but horse didn’t sell there’s either a price issue or some hidden quirk.

[Impractical_Horsewoman]

My guess is that they withdrew the horse because they didn’t feel the trainer had the right connections to get it shown to the buyers they wished to attract.

The fact that the trainer put in a lot of work, saw many buyers, but no bites, makes sense that they withdrew the horse early. They may take it to a different trainer, or wait it out and repost an ad. The worst is when something is for sale for a long time. People wonder what’s wrong with it.

I don’t know if they are leaving the training facility or just remaining there and leaving the horse in training, perhaps hoping that with more training they can sell for more?