At 08:01:18 on 08.02.12, Flicka wrote:
Has anyone read this story in the papers? If this woman wins her case then it could have huge implications for the horse industry. She was trying out a horse to buy and got bucked off, the horse stood on her face when she was on the ground and she had to have her face re-built, not nice, so she is suing the owner of the horse :( She knew the horse could buck when she agreed to ride him but said she didn't realise he would throw in a buck she couldn't sit to. I do think we have to be careful of owners who downright lie about their horses and I've heard terrible stories about this. We definitely need to protect ourselves and be protected from people like that. But was this seller dishonest and don't we all all appreciate that when we get on a horse that they are unpredictable. My mare one day got frightened by something and bucked, I didn't know what had hit me, just one buck and I went sailing through the air. She never bucked like that again, it was a one off. My brother in law has a lovely young mare, so well behaved, but the other day they were on the way home and she leapt in the air and put in a big buck out of the blue, then carried on as normal. Anyway before I blather on anymore lol what do you think? Please read the link first though to get the full story.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2097245/Mother-needed-face-rebuilt-20-ops-test-riding-horse-sues-owners.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

At 09:27:24 on 08.02.12, kibby wrote:
If you are told a horse has bucked then bad luck to you, if you still get on you just have to accept that your probably going to fall off. My issue, the horse is free, your told it can buck. Doesnt this set off anyone else's alarm bells cause mine are going off! If you are convinced the horse is safe and it bucks but it is a genuine one off thing, bummer something must be wrong… if you're convinced a horse is safe but has had a history of bucking and they are covering that up that is when you should be protected. If you willingly get on a horse you have been told can back it is not the owners fault you under estimate the horse/over estimate your riding ability. More fun for us horse riders, eventually it will be impossible to have horses, how are we supposed to sell or buy a horse without trying it first!

At 09:33:28 on 08.02.12, kibby wrote:
But the part about the number of bucks or the height, how are you supposed to prove something like that. Also every single one of my horses would be classified as dangerous as in one point in their life they have bucked higher than 8 inches at some random point in time.

At 10:16:04 on 08.02.12, luckylucy wrote:
Recently there was an article stating that in Shropshire serious injuries as a consequence of riding now outstrips Rugby. What does this tell us. Many horses are overfed and underworked or just bored by the work and react accordingly. I had a horse on trial from a reputable dealer, who on day 3 walking back across a field after a good 1 1/2 work, suddenly dived right and reared up nearly falling backwards, then leapt into a hoofstand back to a rear and continued like this. I remember thinking Holy S---! he isn't going to stop. Finally he backslapped me and I somersaulted over his head and LUCKILY landed cushioned by mud. Like a Tom and Jerry imprint. Two days later said horse did the same in the stable, rearing, fly leaping, fell over, got up smashed his head on the wall....truly horrific. Needless to say the reluctant dealer took him back with endless derisary innuendos about my riding ability. In such a litigious world both parties need protecting, as riders we should be insured, of that there is no doubt. Say we cause a fatal car accident while riding, we would expect a claim. Every time we get on a horse even our own known, it carries the unpredictability that realistically is the thrill of riding. I feel for this poor lady, it must be awful, but trying a horse is a nerve racking business, which goes down the reins, and frequently the most predictable of horse does something untoward! Maybe her experience should galvanize the rest of us to be responsible for our own insurances.

At 10:31:04 on 08.02.12, JaymeeLS wrote:
Terrible thing to happen, but I don't see how she has a case if she was told the horse bucked before she got on. She chose to get on knowing. It would be a completely different story if the horse had been advertised as '100% bombproof' even though the safest of horses can have an unexpected 'moment', and by getting on any horse, any rider should be knowing that they're taking a risk. Regardless of what the story actually says (I don't believe everything tabloids claim to be true lol) it doesn't change my view on this or any other similar situation!

At 19:01:53 on 08.02.12, NMH wrote:
It is very hard on the vendor if the randomly dreadful outcome influences the judgement -almost any fall can result in having a laugh and getting straight up, with only pride dented, or at the other extreme disability or death. Even judges seem to find this hard to separate in their minds. It doesn't Malle it MORE someone's fault if the outcome was dire. It is hard to see what the vendor could have done differently here.

At 22:48:51 on 08.02.12, ToriSilverson wrote:
a horse is an unpredictable animal, by getting on the horses back you accept this fact. i think people suing for injuries after falling off are a joke, if you get on you should be prepared to fall off and get hurt it is a risk sport. whether the horse was deemed "safe" or not should not matter because even the most sedate of horses can act out of character. thats horse riding.

At 22:54:01 on 08.02.12, ToriSilverson wrote:
oh and another point, the horse was being given away for free...is she stupid? of course it wouldnt be "perfect"

At 23:18:07 on 08.02.12, JessAndGrenville123 wrote:
She should not have won the case! You don't want to hurt yourself? Don't ride then lol especially a horse that bucks. Poor woman who is being sued! Maybe i should have more sympathy for the woman but gren trampled my face when i fell off so i don't really have any sympathy, honestly it wasn't that bad, traumatic but in hindsight i knew i had just bought a ex racehorse with issues and although i have a scarred face now i don't really care, i got over it. All horses can be unpredictable like everyone has said, the quietest horse can have a bad day! I don't like the story either at the way they portray the horse, the first section refers to the horse as 'the animal'! Also she could have been protected if she took out a good riders insurance, if she thinks she needs protecting spend hundreds of pounds on golden riders insurance then! God this has got me riled up and i don't even know why, she lives close by lol maybe i should go give her a piece of my mind! Also since i study animal management we have just covered animal legislation and the animal act states that altough the owner is liable for any out of normal behaviour for the species this does not include natural behaviour of the animals wild counterpart, now i though horses in the wild would buck off a predator or human?! Reading the rest is just silly now 'how many bucks a normal horse is expected to do' WTF what defines a 'normal' horse? Am i the only confused one here? :P

At 00:00:53 on 09.02.12, JaymeeLS wrote:

Maybe she over-estimated her own ability and has only even been pig-rooted at most and considers them proper bucks? Who knows. The article says experienced rider, but a few people have pointed out on the article in the comments how inexperienced her position looks. After reading those comments and taking their word for it (like I know any better?! Haha..) seems like a huge over-estimation of her own ability in the first place. :/

(Click here for larger view)