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

[Highflyer1]

I’m not sure it is that easy or cheap to find a 3rd level schoolmaster to take lessons on! And if you do, you’re even less likely to find one that is available daily to meet your schedule, or even 3+ times a week-- unless you lease it.

I am an eventer who has both leased and owned in the past and am currently taking a break from ownership and doing lessons instead, and while there are lots of advantages (price for sure) it’s very different from either leasing or owning and I’m very aware that my lovely lesson horse is only “mine” for an hour at a time.

[2tempe]

Following on Janet’s response to Blue Drifter: Correct that you dont have a possibly sellable asset at end of lease, but you also did not cough up an original purchase price and whatever it took to get the horse to 3rd level.
I have leased out two horses in the last maybe 10 years. Both were offsite to known trainers’ clients. The mare had a colic history; my lease was written that the lessee was responsible for any “regular” vet bills, ie vaccines, coggins, if she popped an abcess, basically the small stuff. Anything that even hinted at colic or major lameness, I would cover and she would be free to terminate the lease at that time. The other horse was much older - in his early 20’s, no material issues. I wrote it pretty much the same way- anything major, my problem. A year into this one I got a call that he had some neuro symptoms; obviously EPM was a concern. I picked him up two days later, cancelled the lease and brought him home. Turned out to be cervical arthritis.
In both cases I wanted full control of anything major - what vet to use, whether to do a lot of tests, or whether to make the big decision, etc.

[BlueDrifter]

Half the folks here say the lessee pays all the vet care costs – including an unforseen injury for which the lessee did not cause. Horse could break their leg in turnout (mine did) and lessee would be responsible for the immediate care and the balance of the lease terms.

Others are saying, “no, you can negotiate something in-between, that catastrophic injuries are the owner’s responsibility” and that still constitutes a lease.

This situation I am referring to is more akin to having someone care for your horse while you are absent – but it is presented as a lease, hence I wondered what the reasonable terms of a lease might be.

In your situation, the length of time is what dictated what you should pay vs what a lessee should pay?

[BlueDrifter]

That makes perfect sense to me, @2Tempe, although I would include any crazy injury that was clearly not a result of the lessee’s care.

[BlueDrifter]

As folks here are describing it, if the horse gets broken, the lessee pays for it’s vet bills and rehab, they don’t get to wash their hands of it. And they don’t have a horse at the end either. The owner has a rehabbed horse for the next lessee.

[enjoytheride]

I think a lot of people have explained to you how leases work and how contracts can vary. I don’t see anyone describing it the way you are. If you don’t like the contract don’t sign it. I haven’t seen anyone describing a lease the way you are, the risk for a lease is almost all for the owner. I 100% expect someone who’s leasing one of my horses to pay to have the vet out for a choke or colic, but I don’t expect them to pay for colic surgery. If someone told me they weren’t going to pay to have a vet out because the horse colicing wasn’t their fault I’d be there in the middle of the night to pick my horse up and I’d make sure the entire state knew to not lease a horse to that person.

I leased out a dressage schoolmaster and when he got older he needed senior feed. You would not believe the people who wanted to use him to earn their Bronze medal but didn’t want to pay to feed him.

[Highflyer1]

I’ve typically only seen the leasee pay for rehab if it is something minimal. And they should always have the opportunity to break the lease and return the horse.
Like, if the horse needs a few stitches and has to be on stall rest for two weeks? I think most would rehab. If the horse has a bowed tendon and needs a year off? Lease is broken and horse is returned.

[BigMama1]

@BlueDrifter

In your situation, the length of time is what dictated what you should pay vs what a lessee should pay?

I think everyone here is saying the same thing - that ordinary expenses are covered by the leaser. Major vet expenses / emergencies are typically covered either by the leaser’s insurance or the owner’s insurance, and either way it is specified in the contract so the leaser knows exactly what they are responsible for.

In my situation, having a trusted friend who was horseless at the time look after my horse was less hassle than finding and vetting potential leasers when it was such a short time frame. Horse in question was only 4 and very green and I didn’t want to risk having an unknown person riding him for 4 months, even under the supervision of my coach.

[BigMama1]

@BlueDrifter

As folks here are describing it, if the horse gets broken, the lessee pays for it’s vet bills and rehab, they don’t get to wash their hands of it. And they don’t have a horse at the end either. The owner has a rehabbed horse for the next lessee.

That’s literally the opposite of what everyone is saying. Re-read the thread. If the horse becomes unusable beyond a specified length of time the lease is usually terminated and the horse returned to its owner. Leaser walks away.

[BlueDrifter]

When the owner bought the horse, they assuming the responsibility of maintaining a pasture ornament – that is a sunk cost. Or at least, I think ethical owners think that way.

It is a big assumption that a horse is going to be so broken that it is a pasture ornament – because the lessee will have to foot the bill to rehab any major breaks – at least if the lease is written as some suggest, that the lessee pays all vet costs.

It sounds to me that an owner can lease out their almost retired schoolmaster, have all it’s costs covered, plus have an additional insurance package that the lessee will cover any costs for which the schoolmaster might incur due to age, or due to some unforseeable event not directly related to lessee.

I would think an owner would cover those type costs – as they would have existed independently of being leased out.

But I hear you guys! That is not how you do it, and there is a line of people ready to lease a 3rd level horse for 25k+ a year AND assume responsibility for all veterinary care.

I understand I am odd man out. Just my sense of what is right.

[enjoytheride]

@BlueDrifter

When the owner bought the horse, they assuming the responsibility of maintaining a pasture ornament – that is a sunk cost. Or at least, I think ethical owners think that way.

It is a big assumption that a horse is going to be so broken that it is a pasture ornament – because the lessee will have to foot the bill to rehab any major breaks – at least if the lease is written as some suggest, that the lessee pays all vet costs.

It sounds to me that an owner can lease out their almost retired schoolmaster, have all it’s costs covered, plus have an additional insurance package that the lessee will cover any costs for which the schoolmaster might incur due to age, or due to some unforseeable event not directly related to lessee.

I would think an owner would cover those type costs – as they would have existed independently of being leased out.

But I hear you guys! That is not how you do it, and there is a line of people ready to lease a 3rd level horse for 25k+ a year AND assume responsibility for all veterinary care.

I understand I am odd man out. Just my sense of what is right.

This is not how it works at all. Nobody has stated that this is how it works except for you. Multiple people have tried to explain how leases work.

[BigMama1]

@BlueDrifter

It is a big assumption that a horse is going to be so broken that it is a pasture ornament – because the lessee will have to foot the bill to rehab any major breaks – at least if the lease is written as some suggest, that the lessee pays all vet costs.

Who here has suggested that besides you? I think you can stop flogging this particular horse now; it is well and truly deceased.

You asked a question. Multiple people have answered it. You don’t like the answer, but it is true nonetheless. A lease agreement can contain whatever terms the two parties agree to put in it. I hope your “friend” finds a situation that suits them.

[BlueDrifter]

I am totally agreeing with you – I can’t explain why everyone thinks that because I disagree, it is worth re-explaining things to me. We can have a difference of opinion.

[BlueDrifter]

Right – that is one way of structuring it. I guess I can see a lameness that happened in the stall, for which the lessee pays vet bills for four weeks until it is determined if rehab would take longer.

How is that scenario accounted for in a lease? As it is presented here, the lessee would pay for the initial MRI, U/S, Prostride, etc. Do I have that wrong?

[BigMama1]

In most cases the lease contract would specify which party or which party’s insurance, would pay. MRI’s and X-rays are not routine or minor care, so as with other major vet expenses it would usually be the leaser’s insurance or the owner who paid those bills. And in most cases, if the lameness or injury means the horse isn’t usable for more than 4 weeks (or whatever the contract specifies) the lease gets terminated.

You keep asking the same question in different ways, but you are going to keep getting the same answer. Not sure what you are expecting?

[conniemary]

You seem to feel the owner benefits from having the person lease this horse, even though the lessee won’t compete it and you say they don’t ride at 3rd level. This lease is highly unlikely to increase the horse’s value - it is much more likely that the horse’s value will decrease over the lease period.

The lessee can probably find another horse to “not compete” on. Presumably they have a reason for being willing to pay to ride this horse.

[meupatdoes]

Lol, the other way to look at this is, if you are doing all of the riding, and not paying a lease fee, why should the owner pay for the farrier and the joint supplements???

[meupatdoes]

This scenario is covered by the lesser carrying insirance on the horse and paying up to their deductible.

[enjoytheride]

@BlueDrifter

am totally agreeing with you – I can’t explain why everyone thinks that because I disagree, it is worth re-explaining things to me. We can have a difference of opinion.

It’s not a difference of opinion, people have explained to you how leases can and do work but you keep misunderstanding them. It’s not that you disagree it’s that you don’t understand what people are telling you.

[trubandloki]

@enjoytheride

It’s not that you disagree it’s that you don’t understand what people are telling you.

It seems like the OP does not want to understand.