What are typical lease terms for 3rd level off-breed horse?

[BlueDrifter]

Update: I thought folks might be interested in the outcome.

The horse was remaining in the same barn and with same trainer and lesson plan, so the owner risk was a bit minimized than an off-premises lease. The owner really wanted to make sure horse was well cared for, and agreed to pay major vet bills, no lease fee. Lessee paid everything else.

And then the happy ending: owner agreed to sell horse and tack to lessee for very low five figures. A win all around.

---

I was surprised to read that lease terms for competition horses tend to have the lessee pay for all board, feed, training, farrier, vet, AND a lease fee.

Are those the same terms for someone who wants to lease their horse out to a non-competitive rider?

The lessors want someone to care for their horse, keep it fit, have weekly lessons with trainer. They are not looking for the horse to be shown or improved while they are out of country.

In my past, I have paid people to do that, not have them pay me, lol.

[BigMama1]

Totally depends on the horse, rider, and owner. A lease like you describe is not at all uncommon for horses who are actively competing, particularly high value ones. I think it’s more common the h/j world, but they definitely exist in dressage too.

That being said, “free leases” where the leaser doesn’t pay a fee but takes care of all expenses including board, training, farrier, vet, etc. are very common too.

[BlueDrifter]

Is that just for the show barns?

I guess I can see it in a competitive world, where the horse is a tool to get you to the next level – but when that isn’t the main goal of the lessor, it seems steep for the lessee.

Heck, even when you rent a house, you aren’t responsible for the electrical and plumbing, lol.

.

[Janet]

I have been on both sides of several leases. In each case, he person leasing the horse takes over ALL expenses, including mortality/medical insurance.

None of these involved a show barn, or a horse that was currently competing at a high level (one was doing Beginner Novice eventing).

It is more like leasing a car than renting a house. When you lease a car, you are responsible for all expenses.

If the horse is an active competition horse, there is often a lease fee (typically 1/3 of the horse’s value), in addition to ALL expenses.

If I were leasing a horse that is currently competing at 3rd level, I would DEFINITELY expect to pay a lease fee as well as expenses.

[Mersidoats]

Anyone who offers a 3rd level+ horse for lease has put serious time and resources into either purchasing, maintaining, and training that horse. That is not something you give out for free.

[BigMama1]

I have never heard of a lease where the leaser didn’t pay all of the horse’s expenses. Basically they are assuming the role and responsibility of ownership, without the expense of purchasing a horse. That goes for competitive and non-competitive horses.

The only exception I can think of is a “part lease” where the leaser pays a percentage of the expenses and has use of the horse a certain number of rides a week. In those cases someone else is usually riding the horse as well.

It sounds like you are talking about taking care of a horse / riding it while the owners are away? If that was for a short term, like a week or even a month, then I wouldn’t expect the caretaker to pay any of the horse’s expenses. But if they are getting exclusive use of the horse for an extended period of time, including the ability to compete, then of course they should be responsible for the horse’s expenses.

[TheBigEasy]

In my mind I have these categorized as a
Free lease - owner pays everything except lessons/showing
Care lease- leasee covers care costs, board, vet, farrier
Full lease - leasee pays all care AND a fee for the use of the horse, assumed for competition.

When I browse sale ads, I see everything from a 25% -75% lease-to-sale price. I always wonder about why it’s such a range.

I free-leased my 1st level horse over the winter. DH wanted to snow-bird and I wanted my horse kept in fitness. Found a junior with capable skills who would ride with the trainer weekly to ensure he didn’t regress, but didn’t expect any further education.
I didn’t expect a dime and she was doing me a favor, and I, her. She got to ride a nice horse (albeit in the dead of winter) and my horse stayed in shape. I’d of been paying his expenses either way.

I suppose any lease is dependent on what you want, and what the lessee wants out of it.

[BlueDrifter]

Free lease. Or something between free lease and care lease

This is how I imagined it would be – that the rider was doing the owner a favor – and the costs would be split between owner and rider in some equitable way. But clearly, I am living in the past, lol.

Given that the care lease would be so expensive, it seems more practical to buy a horse, especially since rider doesn’t need a 3rd level horse and is not competing… but I get that coming up with purchase price might not be feasible.

[BlueDrifter]

My eyes are opened.

Given the costs, it seems leasing is really only a good value for a competitive rider wanting to go up the levels. For a non-competitor, that doesn’t need the 3rd level skills, the costs are high.

[Cowgirl]

And I would never EVER lease any of my horses!!! The risk of someone else making them lame is not worth it! Why would anyone think they could lease a horse for free? Third level horses cost in the high5s to mid sixs these days, especially if they are good enough to help a non experienced person get their medals.

[Highflyer1]

At least in my area, a lot of what used to be the typical free/care lease type horses are now in the mid to high four figures range for a year lease. Basically anything that can be competed at any level in almost any discipline and is sensible enough for an intermediate rider is in high demand.

I would certainly expect a 3rd level horse that is sound and able to compete to rate a five figure fee regardless of whether the leasee intends to compete it. If it were being leased with a stipulation that it not be shown that would be different although I would imagine there are still people out there looking for the experience of learning from a nice, educated horse.

[luvmyhackney]

I’m currently care-leasing a horse for a friend while she is out of county for three years, half way through the lease now.

He’s not as valuable per say as third level dressage horse but he’s kid safe at all three gaits and starting lateral work, just a good all rounder. Like you can canter on him bareback backwards and shoot arrows kinda safe. If he was third level or came with significant training, I would have probably paid a lease fee.

[Impractical_Horsewoman]

Another advantage of the lease, especially with an older, schoolmaster-type, is that by the end of the lease, the responsibility of vet care and retirement shifts back to the owner.

Also, a lease is always a risk, especially an off-property lease, or a lease with student of a trainer who isn’t also the trainer of the owner. Horses with higher level skills can get untrained (or injured) and getting them retrained or rehabbed can be costly.

I’ve only just part-leased horses (3 rides a week) that the owner couldn’t ride because of time, living away in a different state. It was just a fee, to offset the cost of board on a horse the owner couldn’t ride and to keep him going. Plus, I agreed to lesson with an approved trainer on one of my ride days weekly. But I’m not now, because these types of agreements are harder and harder to find. I always thought I was getting an amazing deal, though, frankly, even though these weren’t on schoolmasters, just outgrown and older ponies/honies.

[2tempe]

I’ve been involved in several leases over the years. IMO it seems unusual for a 3rd level horse lease arrangement to include a fee rather than just assumption of "operating’ expenses during the lease term. Not sure that “off breed” makes a difference.
On the other hand, transactions occur based on supply and demand - perhaps the owner believes this is a good enough horse in a tight market to justify a fee and expenses. And perhaps someone will step up and pay it. As mentioned above somewhere, very common in h/j world.

[BigMama1]

I don’t see it as the rider doing the owner a favour. I see it as mutually beneficial to both parties.

Rider gets exclusive use of a healthy, sound, trained horse without the expense and long-term commitment of purchasing one. There is usually language in the contract about termination of the lease should the horse get injured and become unusable for an extended period of time, so the leaser doesn’t have the worry of paying to maintain a pasture ornament for years, or dealing with an elderly horse and end of life decisions.

Basically the owner is the one assuming the risk that their sound, healthy, Third Level horse may come back at the end of the lease period (or before) unsound, unhappy, injured, etc. The leaser has enjoyment and use of the horse with very little long term risk or cost.

[BlueDrifter]

I certainly don’t think anyone wants to lease a horse for free.

But to be responsible for all the vet costs – I mean, what if he colics or has ulcers, or does something in turnout that precludes his rideability for three months? I guess the lessee has to pay, right?

[Janet]

@BlueDrifter

Given the costs, it seems leasing is really only a good value for a competitive rider wanting to go up the levels.

Not necessarily.

Decades ago, I had to put down my youngish horse due to septic arthritis that spread to her liver, after months of veterinary intervention. I wanted to ride again, but i was not ready to start “horse shopping”.

My vet had a 12 year old AngloArab x Trak. He was 14h 3" and recovering from a suspensory injury. He had reached the stage where he needed slow consistent work under saddle, and my vet (who was only a few years out of vet school herself) did not have the time to ride him. She (free/care) leased him to me on the condition that I followed a very specific rehab schedule.

Anybody who has seen me can tall you that I am NOT small, and I would never have looked at a 14h 3" horse to buy, and I certainly would not have taken on a horse with an unresolved suspensory injury. But for my immediate situation, wanting something to ride until I was ready to go “horse shopping”, it was a good fit.

In fact, he came completely sound, and I continued to lease, and compete, him for another 4 or so years (and had a lot of fun with him) until I bought a new horse for myself.

This is a picture of us competing (pre safety vest rule).

[BlueDrifter]

I mention “off-breed” just because I wasn’t talking about a huge warmblood/TB that I figured most competitive riders would want to learn from, especially if they are paying 5 figures to lease.

[BlueDrifter]

Great photo and story. I guess it depends upon the cost as well. Would you have leased this same guy for $20K+ per year?

[BlueDrifter]

I think it is mutually beneficial, too. But the risks for the owner seem very low with the lessee footing the bill for any injuries or unsoundness, requiring the lessee work with existing trainers who can oversee anything going south, and likely the owner not leasing to someone for whom injury would be likely. (Now in H/J I can see that jumping is an inherent risk, but for dressage???)