Sellers contracts....

[Danielle_E.]

I am a member of a arabian forum and recently on that forum it was reported about the neglect and seizure of some 15 straight egyptian horses. I found it very interesting to read the suggestion of one of the posters their said that sellers should put first right of refusal should the buyer sell the animal down the road but also it should stipulate that at any time should the animal "because of neglect" (not illness) get to a certain body score, that the owner has the legal right to come and get the animal. Now I was thinking how do you know if the animal is in trouble? I guess you would have to put in that a dated picture is to be submited twice a year... not sure how it would work but I thought it was a interesting suggestion. In the case of these arabians the rescue stepped in and one of the seized animals was a VERY prominent stallion with unbelievable pedigree. Now the policy of the rescue is to geld and they did

which is a big loss to the straight egyptian community, these bloodlines are now lost forever.

Gini, if you are out there, the policy of CMHR is to geld is it not when you get a stallion in. What would you do if you got a starved mini that you knew was once a world champion and lets say was very well known in the mini circles. Would you still geld or make an exception?????

This is the one that was gelded

El Gamill is one of the last Straight Egyptian, Al Khamsa sons of *Jamilll in the world

 

[Jill]

That is a very interesting idea.

However, as a person who takes very good care of her horses, I would not be interested in buying from a seller who thinks she's going to "require" that I submit pictures to her periodically.

That said, I do keep in touch, voluntarily, with those I have bought from and keep them updated about the horse. However, if that was required up front, I'd figure they are not the type of people I'd want to be involved with buying from (who wants strings attached or the potential to be dealing with a control freak when they make nice horses every day?).

 

[MSRminis]

The few I have sold all have first right of refusal-of course you are at their mercy to call you. I try to keep in touch with both buyers and seller because as a seller I know that I love to see and hear how they are doing!!

 

[Danielle_E.]

Since I keep in touch with the people I purchase horses from it wouldn't bother me one bit to do this. I wouldn't take it as the former owner being a control freak but someone who cares about her/his horses welfare, especially the ones that they have brought into this world.

I see your point and this is the reason I believe that we need some kind of ebay type rating system on sellers AND buyers. It would alleviate this. Barring not having this in place I think that asking for references when buying from someone or the seller asking the buyer for references (farrier, vet, etc) might help ensure animals are going into caring hands.

 

[Minimor]

I have to agree with Jill. Horse care is not a problem here--ours are all looked after extremely well. But there is no way I'm going to buy from anyone that makes it a condition of sale that I have to send photos of the horse 2 times a year to "prove" that horse is being well cared for. I do keep in touch with people I have bought from and even send them photos of the horse whenever I take some "if" they are the sort to be interested in hearing follow up reports on the horses they have sold (some just aren't). But to be forced to send photos to prove I am the caregiver I claim to be...no. And what happens if I miss sending one of the required photos? (Heck, I didn't get around to taking my registry photos in June/July when the horses look good & so now my papers have these fuzzy, rather scruffy looking photos on them....if I didn't get around to taking registry photos how likely is it that I'd get around to taking "proof of care" photos for an ex-owner?) I miss sending a couple of photos, so what, the seller comes & repossesses the horse? I don't think so.

And for all I know, the seller's idea of "neglect" might be different than mine. There are people who believe horses should always be "fat". What if I get my horse in fit condition, and since he is now "not fat" the seller says that I am neglecting him? Or if I don't clip his bridle path all winter & the seller figures bridle paths must always be clipped & an unclipped bridle path constitutes "neglect"? I know those things are not "your" intention, Danielle, but there are those who would/could take things to that extreme. On the chance that a seller was that sort of control freak, I simply wouldn't be interested in dealing with that person.

Even references--there is absolutely no problem in my getting vet references; both clinics I deal with would give me glowing references for my animal care--but I tend to figure anyone that says "references required" is just too much trouble to deal with.

On the few horses I have sold I have checked references....those of my own choosing. I do not ask for references from the potential buyer, I just get a feel of the person & then check up on him/her via contacts I have (or find) in that person's area. This works very well for me.

 

[SHANA]

I put in my sales contract that I have right of first refusal on the horses I have sold. So far I have bought back 2 horses, one I resold to my cousin and the other is still here and now my hubby's riding horse. These 2 were both homebred arabians.

 

[River1018]

It's kind of funny to read this......because when I purchased my Shetland Sheep Dog from a very well known breeder, she actually stated in her contract we were to send her a photo when the puppy was a year old. It impressed me that she cared enough to want that......I was just a bit surprised tho, that it was in her contract.

 

[runamuk]

I am a member of a arabian forum and recently on that forum it was reported about the neglect and seizure of some 15 straight egyptian horses. I found it very interesting to read the suggestion of one of the posters their said that sellers should put first right of refusal should the buyer sell the animal down the road but also it should stipulate that at any time should the animal "because of neglect" (not illness) get to a certain body score, that the owner has the legal right to come and get the animal. Now I was thinking how do you know if the animal is in trouble? I guess you would have to put in that a dated picture is to be submited twice a year... not sure how it would work but I thought it was a interesting suggestion. In the case of these arabians the rescue stepped in and one of the seized animals was a VERY prominent stallion with unbelievable pedigree. Now the policy of the rescue is to geld and they did

which is a big loss to the straight egyptian community, these bloodlines are now lost forever.

Gini, if you are out there, the policy of CMHR is to geld is it not when you get a stallion in. What would you do if you got a starved mini that you knew was once a world champion and lets say was very well known in the mini circles. Would you still geld or make an exception?????

This is the one that was gelded

El Gamill is one of the last Straight Egyptian, Al Khamsa sons of *Jamilll in the world

I have put that in some of my contracts. I try to keep in touch with people who own animals from me be it rescue dogs, cats, horses whatever and have been contacted and even when I didn't exercise my option I did find out where the animal went.

I can tell you a group of very well bred with a number of champions dogs recently were siezed and yes all were altered as the humane organizations don't give a rats patootie they MUST be sneutered. And even if the breeder finds out and offers to take them back they will be sneutered. One dog breeder I hope to one day get a dog from, insists on being a co owner for this reason. God forbid my family was killed in a car wreck etc....it is the only way she can truly be responsible for the dogs she produces. I actually do not have a problem with this to me it shows great integrity.

Twice I was involved with very old arabian stallions who had once been champions and ended up in neglect situations, thanks to freezebrands we were able to positively identify both.

Responsible dog breeders willingly will take back any dog they bred and sold at any point, something the horse industry hasn't quite caught up with YET

 

[Danielle_E.]

Thanks for the replies. I am a bit surprised though that some wouldn't buy from someone who might put this in a contract. I would have thought it would have been taken the way the other poster said, that the seller had "integrity" and cares and doesn't want to see their animals neglected. Do you feel that if someone puts that in a contract it is an automatic reflection on the buyer? If I was buying I would be more than happy to provide visual updates. We all talk about how horrible neglect can be and yet it seems we aren't ready yet to nip it in the bud or stop it until rescues have to get involved.

I personally don't think a seller would worry about a horse that is show-fit. I am talking about a horse on the BSC of 3 and under which means VERY THIN and I mention also "not a sick horse" (such as having strangles or something that makes their weight drop like al lead balloon). I don't think putting in a contract that a horse that gets to a body score of 3 or below (non-medical issue) would be "taking it to the extreme".

 

[Jill]

The reason I feel that way, that it would limit my interest in buying from the seller is that I know of so many horse and dog people who are total busy bodies. Of course I take wonderful care of my horses, and any seller I have ever bought from knows at least as much as they want to about the horse's current life and probably more than they actually want to know in some cases. I'm pretty good at being able to tell who is sincere and who is not when it comes to doing business (both with horses and in my career). I just don't "need" any string attached and if someone has to periodically check up on me to see if I'm worthy of buying from them -- they are probably not actually ready to sell that horse and they're not going to be selling it to me.

 

[mininik]

I agree with Jill, no thank you!

 

[Minimor]

The reason I feel that way, that it would limit my interest in buying from the seller is that I know of so many horse and dog people who are total busy bodies. Of course I take wonderful care of my horses, and any seller I have ever bought from knows at least as much as they want to about the horse's current life and probably more than they actually want to know in some cases. I'm pretty good at being able to tell who is sincere and who is not when it comes to doing business (both with horses and in my career). I just don't "need" any string attached and if someone has to periodically check up on me to see if I'm worthy of buying from them -- they are probably not actually ready to sell that horse and they're not going to be selling it to me.

Exactly!

We all talk about how horrible neglect can be and yet it seems we aren't ready yet to nip it in the bud or stop it until rescues have to get involved.

I'm not quite sure how that figures in here? Whether or not such wording was in the sales agreement for any horse I bought would have no effect whatsoever on nipping neglect in the bud...because with or without such wording I would never neglect a horse or any other animal I own.
And yes, there are control freaks, busy bodies, whatever you want to call them, who have some very odd ideas of how a horse "should" be kept. I know they exist, because I've come across at least two of them in the not so distant past, and what a nightmare it would be to buy a horse with such a contract from a person like that and then have to live up to that contract. Truly, a nightmare.

 

[Danielle_E.]

I guess we just see things differently. When I read the suggestion on the other forum everyone there on the arabian forum though it was a wonderful idea. I don't think they took it to the level you did about thinking it was about "control freaks" but more a way to ensure that the animal you sell doesn't end up in a situation that is less than stellar for it. Now in the thread it was not mentioned about the pictures, it was just mentioned to put something in the selling contract and I quote here

For sellers, please begin to use a "First Right of Refusal" in your contracts and try to include a "Failure to Provide Proper Care" provision. There is altogether too many horse starvations and I believe if we work together, we can help reduce those numbers by being savvy in our techniques - always putting the horse first.

Nowhere do I find this being a "control freak" but putting controls in to protect the animals that you breed and sell. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. I am sorry if you have run into "control freaks" as sellers. Always had wonderful and caring sellers to deal with

.

 

[StarRidgeAcres]

I don't think I'd mind that type of clause in a sales contract for a horse I purchased. There may be a specific seller that would sort of send up some red flags for me and I wouldn't want to purchase from them with that type of contract, but for the most part I don't think I'd mind. I personally have put first right of refusal clauses in mine when selling horses and I know that NONE of the buyers actually contacted me when they went to resell the horses.

So, I don't really know how to enforce that. I do ask for references and I actually check them, but that's about all I've been able to "control."

 

[Jill]

The first right of refusal is something I do like a lot. Anytime I have sold a horse, regardless of if they seller had first right or not, I have first let the seller know I was planning to sell the horse and asked if they were interested in having him/ her back. To me, the first right of refusal is a peace of mind when buying... that if it doesn't work out for the horse and myself, there is a good home that may want him/her back.