|
|
Post by Louise Dixon on Jan 9, 2013 18:17:19 GMT
I hope things get sorted out in court so neither you nor the mare owner are out of pocket, Jane. Good luck.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2013 18:27:01 GMT
Legally I can't sign a covering cert - I didn't see the mare covered! So who is the innocent party , THANKS for your support!! NOT .. This woman has another stallion- so she could be covering mares with either - my boy didn't go to cover mares he went to be shown under saddle...., I was warning mare owners ..... the stallion owner is on the passport and it is easy to check when enquiring about using one, it is in the owner section & the address ... so if it doesn't tally stay away..... there are some very unscrupulous people in this world. If the stallion's passport doesn't have the person who is standing him on the passport stay away.... I suppose whatever I say will not satisfy some folk! you have already judged. But what happens to the poor mare owners who have in good faith sent their mares to be covered by the stallion and whether they paid the woman a stud fee or not they now have foals that are not registerable ? They are the innocent party in all of this....... |
|
dazycutter
Happy to help
The reason a dog has so many friends is that he wags his tail instead of his Tongue.
Posts: 7,933
|
Post by dazycutter on Jan 9, 2013 18:33:03 GMT
|
|
Milliesmum
H G Addict
COCKERP00S RULE!!!
Posts: 23,901
|
Post by Milliesmum on Jan 9, 2013 18:37:48 GMT
Might be worth naming this unscrupulous person, or at least give an area, I wonder how many mares he covered that haven't been in touch with you? After all they wouldn't, if they weren't interested in registering the foal.
|
|
|
|
Post by brindlerainbow on Jan 9, 2013 18:45:31 GMT
Yes what an excellent idea MM although I think a few of us have a pretty good idea who this woman is that had the stallion  If it is who we think ( not 100% certain but have seen pics on FB of one of Cayberrys friends with her stallion on loan ) if im wrong in I disagreeumptions then I apologise. However if im right then this is a woman who has ripped people off all over the place and it is common knowledge too!!!! Her reputation speaks for itself and she is certainly not a person to be trusted..... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2013 18:46:48 GMT
I will after the court judgement which has been applied for at the beginning of the week. This is in the south east.
I often loan stallions out to be ridden & have had a good relationship with their loaners, they have won and look good - I think you are barking up the wrong tree Brindlerainbow!
|
|
dazycutter
Happy to help
The reason a dog has so many friends is that he wags his tail instead of his Tongue.
Posts: 7,933
|
Post by dazycutter on Jan 9, 2013 19:22:52 GMT
Might be worth naming this unscrupulous person, or at least give an area, I wonder how many mares he covered that haven't been in touch with you? After all they wouldn't, if they weren't interested in registering the foal. Not mine, just soemone I know.. lets wait till spring and see what pops out.. will soon know, then I think the sh1t will hit the fan.. LOL |
|
|
|
Post by brindlerainbow on Jan 9, 2013 19:23:29 GMT
Yes apologies if the wrong person
|
|
|
|
Post by RSTOCK on Jan 9, 2013 19:37:37 GMT
Yes what an excellent idea MM although I think a few of us have a pretty good idea who this woman is that had the stallion If it is who we think ( not 100% certain but have seen pics on FB of one of Cayberrys friends with her stallion on loan ) if im wrong in I disagreeumptions then I apologise. However if im right then this is a woman who has ripped people off all over the place and it is common knowledge too!!!! Her reputation speaks for itself and she is certainly not a person to be trusted..... If that is aim at me Mrs, you couldn't be more wrong! I can assure you Starstorm was never used for covering whilst with me other than on Janes own mare, Countrygirl, whos foal was much in demand and sold before weaning. Jane and I are still good friends and I have 2 of her colts here with me now, that i own. Neither is yet licenced but shall be in due course, nor would i do this to a good friend. So, thanks for trying to cause bother in my name again, but it was not necessary. We were extremely lucky to have had Starstorm on showing lease from Jane and he was looked after like a king, whilst with us . Regards, Rachel Stock. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2013 19:47:46 GMT
Country girls next foal is sold already because of its breeding and its not even born yet!
I know Rachel wouldn't use me or mine - not like this other person - she has had plenty of opportunity over the years - its a shame you have such an opinion of her.
|
|
|
|
Post by RSTOCK on Jan 9, 2013 19:54:01 GMT
Country girls next foal is sold already because of its breeding and its not even born yet! I know Rachel wouldn't use me or mine - not like this other person - she has had plenty of opportunity over the years - its a shame you have such an opinion of her. Thanks Jane, hope you get all of this sorted out - remember anything i can do, just shout may even have some room in a few weeks. Now, that is all cleared up can i go back to working? No need for an apology BR, just perhaps in future don't jump to conclusions, Jane is the best mate a girl could have and i certainly wouldn't do a thing to damage that, nor the reputation of her wonderful stud...happy new year to you all. |
|
|
|
Post by kilnstown on Jan 10, 2013 9:26:51 GMT
Frankly if I was a mare owner and found myself in a situation like this I would be furious that you couldnt sort it out without the need for DNA tests ect, I would seriously consider taking both the owner and the loanee to court, as the owner of the stallion you should have had a proper contract drawn up with specific details of what was and wasnt allowed, as the loanee I suppose once they had agreed to buy the stallion from yourself they would assume he was now thier property to do with as they please, a complete shambles from both sides, and totally unprofessional.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2013 12:02:41 GMT
Frankly if I was a mare owner and found myself in a situation like this I would be furious that you couldnt sort it out without the need for DNA tests ect, I would seriously consider taking both the owner and the loanee to court, as the owner of the stallion you should have had a proper contract drawn up with specific details of what was and wasnt allowed, as the loanee I suppose once they had agreed to buy the stallion from yourself they would assume he was now thier property to do with as they please, a complete shambles from both sides, and totally unprofessional. Lets hope it doesn't happen to you then! I had all your suggestions in place. the ownership was to be passed on to the new owner on full payment - which has never happened. |
|
|
|
Post by Louise Dixon on Jan 10, 2013 12:22:16 GMT
Frankly if I was a mare owner and found myself in a situation like this I would be furious that you couldnt sort it out without the need for DNA tests ect, I would seriously consider taking both the owner and the loanee to court, as the owner of the stallion you should have had a proper contract drawn up with specific details of what was and wasnt allowed, as the loanee I suppose once they had agreed to buy the stallion from yourself they would assume he was now thier property to do with as they please, a complete shambles from both sides, and totally unprofessional. The whole situation is a big mess, but as Jane (who I don't know personally at all) had stated above, she HAD these measures in place. Jane has explained that she cannot issue a covering certificate as she does not know for fact that her stallion covered this mare. As the loaner was not honest enough to stick to the contract, how does Jane know that her stallion did cover the mare? It could just have easily been the loaners' other stallion. Unprofessional behaviour would be to issue a covering certificate without the DNA proof - the foal could in its future life be mated to a close relative, or even in the case of a filly its own father, if its parentage was incorrectly recorded. Jane quite clearlys i sympathetic to the situation of the mare owner, but this does not mean she should compromise her principles or behaviour. If I was the mare owner in this situation, yes I would be extremely frustrated, but I would want to be sure I knew the breeding of my foal too. I think it is unfair that Jane is being criticised in this way when by issuing the warning to breeders to be careful to check things out, she is trying to find a little bit of good in a horrid situation. |
|
sarahp
Happy to help
Posts: 9,510
|
Post by sarahp on Jan 10, 2013 12:30:16 GMT
I agree, Jane is a victim here, as are the mare owners, and is behaving entirely correctly as I see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazychick on Jan 10, 2013 15:54:14 GMT
Frankly if I was a mare owner and found myself in a situation like this I would be furious that you couldnt sort it out without the need for DNA tests ect, I would seriously consider taking both the owner and the loanee to court, as the owner of the stallion you should have had a proper contract drawn up with specific details of what was and wasnt allowed, as the loanee I suppose once they had agreed to buy the stallion from yourself they would assume he was now thier property to do with as they please, a complete shambles from both sides, and totally unprofessional. Have you actually read any of the post made by the stallion owner?!  What exactly is unprofessional about a stallion going out on ridden loan (NOT breeding loan) where it is clearly stated that he is not to be used until fully paid for and transfer of ownership is completed? What is unprofessional about not giving out covering certificates without proof of parentage? What case do you think you'd have against the stallion OWNER in court?! The stallion owner is going to court because the loaner BROKE the contract! |
|
|
|
Post by amumwithapony on Jan 10, 2013 16:07:02 GMT
Kilnstown is as entitled to anyone else on an opinion in this matter.
If the relevant paperwork was not lodged with the breed society then personally, if I were a breeder and owner of a stallion placed in this situation, once I had the proof via a DNA test that my stallion was the sire of the foals in question then I would without a doubt give them the covering certificate with no further costs and the pursue the loaner for any costs I felt I was owed.
I wouldn't be charging an additional fee to the owners of the mares. They have paid already and will no doubt have to pay for a DNA test too.
The person who had the stallion on loan is the one at fault. But the owner of the stallion should maybe have lodged the correct paperwork with the breed society with a caveat to state that this information could be passed onto anyone enquiring about whether the person who had him on ridden loan had the right to stand him at stud.
And the owner of the stallion has to take some responsibilty as they have obviously allowed their stallion to be taken by someone untrustworthy.
It is irrelevant whether that person was a close friend or not. And at the end of the day if he wasn't paid for then he was still owned by the OP, therefore IMO she should do the right thing by the owners of the mares, if only to protect the foals.
In a similar situation, if I had a mare out on loan with a view to being purchased by the loaner and came back in foal when she wasn't on breeding loan I couldn't and wouldn't just wash my hands of the foal, regardless of whether I wanted one or not. It would become my responsibilty.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazychick on Jan 10, 2013 16:30:52 GMT
If the relevant paperwork was not lodged with the breed society then personally, if I were a breeder and owner of a stallion placed in this situation, once I had the proof via a DNA test that my stallion was the sire of the foals in question then I would without a doubt give them the covering certificate with no further costs and the pursue the loaner for any costs I felt I was owed. I wouldn't be charging an additional fee to the owners of the mares. They have paid already and will no doubt have to pay for a DNA test too. The person who had the stallion on loan is the one at fault. But the owner of the stallion should maybe have lodged the correct paperwork with the breed society with a caveat to state that this information could be passed onto anyone enquiring about whether the person who had him on ridden loan had the right to stand him at stud. And the owner of the stallion has to take some responsibilty as they have obviously allowed their stallion to be taken by someone untrustworthy. All the relevant paper work is with the society... which is why a covering certificate can't be issued even if the breeder was willing to do so without proof. It is the society that is demanding DNA tests when the foal is born because they know the person loaning the pony should't have been standing him at stud! Obviously you wouldn't knowingly allow someone untrustworthy to take your pony! You just don't expect your 'friends' to be untrustworthy do you?! How do you know the mare owner has paid already? A lot of owners only pay once the covering certificate is issued and some studs offer no foal, no fee. It is up to the mare owner to claim back costs via court as they also are a victim from the irresponsible loaner! The foal will be protected, it isn't just about the money - but you do usually have to pay for a covering certificate. This thread was set up as a warning... do you think that the OP would have set this off if they didn't care about the breed? |
|
|
|
Post by kilnstown on Jan 10, 2013 16:55:44 GMT
Frankly if I was a mare owner and found myself in a situation like this I would be furious that you couldnt sort it out without the need for DNA tests ect, I would seriously consider taking both the owner and the loanee to court, as the owner of the stallion you should have had a proper contract drawn up with specific details of what was and wasnt allowed, as the loanee I suppose once they had agreed to buy the stallion from yourself they would assume he was now thier property to do with as they please, a complete shambles from both sides, and totally unprofessional. Have you actually read any of the post made by the stallion owner?! What exactly is unprofessional about a stallion going out on ridden loan (NOT breeding loan) where it is clearly stated that he is not to be used until fully paid for and transfer of ownership is completed? What is unprofessional about not giving out covering certificates without proof of parentage? What case do you think you'd have against the stallion OWNER in court?! The stallion owner is going to court because the loaner BROKE the contract! I did read the op posts, she did not have a relavent contract drawn up, it was done through PM's and no official channels until the Sh1t hit the preveribial fan, I am sure now its going to court , the correct paper work is with the society. Both Owner and Loaner are at fault IMHO, and as said had I been a mare owner who had used this stallion in good faith I would be furious to be caught up in a dispute such as this between the owner and loanee and would be looking to recoup the cost of my stud fee, dna testing, keep, loss of value for unregisterable foal (if it came to that), and the waste of a breeding year for a mare. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2013 16:56:00 GMT
Kilnstown is as entitled to anyone else on an opinion in this matter. If the relevant paperwork was not lodged with the breed society then personally, if I were a breeder and owner of a stallion placed in this situation, once I had the proof via a DNA test that my stallion was the sire of the foals in question then I would without a doubt give them the covering certificate with no further costs and the pursue the loaner for any costs I felt I was owed. I wouldn't be charging an additional fee to the owners of the mares. They have paid already and will no doubt have to pay for a DNA test too. The person who had the stallion on loan is the one at fault. But the owner of the stallion should maybe have lodged the correct paperwork with the breed society with a caveat to state that this information could be passed onto anyone enquiring about whether the person who had him on ridden loan had the right to stand him at stud. And the owner of the stallion has to take some responsibilty as they have obviously allowed their stallion to be taken by someone untrustworthy. It is irrelevant whether that person was a close friend or not. And at the end of the day if he wasn't paid for then he was still owned by the OP, therefore IMO she should do the right thing by the owners of the mares, if only to protect the foals. In a similar situation, if I had a mare out on loan with a view to being purchased by the loaner and came back in foal when she wasn't on breeding loan I couldn't and wouldn't just wash my hands of the foal, regardless of whether I wanted one or not. It would become my responsibilty. How do I know what she has or has not covered with my stallion or her other stallion - I don't have a crystal ball! I can't see how you can blame me at all - I sent my pony in good faith to be produced under saddle, the breed society have been aware right from the start... oh some of you are so judgemental, don't know why I bothered now. That is the last I will say on this matter until after the court judgement. I was just trying to warn mare owners! never mind just carry on with your lives! |
|
|
|
Post by crazychick on Jan 10, 2013 17:01:32 GMT
Have you actually read any of the post made by the stallion owner?! What exactly is unprofessional about a stallion going out on ridden loan (NOT breeding loan) where it is clearly stated that he is not to be used until fully paid for and transfer of ownership is completed? What is unprofessional about not giving out covering certificates without proof of parentage? What case do you think you'd have against the stallion OWNER in court?! The stallion owner is going to court because the loaner BROKE the contract! I did read the op posts, she did not have a relavent contract drawn up, it was done through PM's and no official channels until the Sh1t hit the preveribial fan, I am sure now its going to court , the correct paper work is with the society. Both Owner and Loaner are at fault IMHO, and as said had I been a mare owner who had used this stallion in good faith I would be furious to be caught up in a dispute such as this between the owner and loanee and would be looking to recoup the cost of my stud fee, dna testing, keep, loss of value for unregisterable foal (if it came to that), and the waste of a breeding year for a mare. By law PM's (on facebook or wherever) are official evidence in court! Just as much so as an email or printed word document. The stallion owner is well aware of society rules having been a breeder for 30+ years and having spend time as a society council member. Yes I wouldn't blame owner for wanting to reclaim costs - I just don't see how she could claim of a party that is just as innocent as her! |
|
|
|
Post by elmere on Jan 10, 2013 17:30:16 GMT
Kilnstown is as entitled to anyone else on an opinion in this matter. If the relevant paperwork was not lodged with the breed society then personally, if I were a breeder and owner of a stallion placed in this situation, once I had the proof via a DNA test that my stallion was the sire of the foals in question then I would without a doubt give them the covering certificate with no further costs and the pursue the loaner for any costs I felt I was owed. I wouldn't be charging an additional fee to the owners of the mares. They have paid already and will no doubt have to pay for a DNA test too. The person who had the stallion on loan is the one at fault. But the owner of the stallion should maybe have lodged the correct paperwork with the breed society with a caveat to state that this information could be passed onto anyone enquiring about whether the person who had him on ridden loan had the right to stand him at stud. And the owner of the stallion has to take some responsibilty as they have obviously allowed their stallion to be taken by someone untrustworthy. It is irrelevant whether that person was a close friend or not. And at the end of the day if he wasn't paid for then he was still owned by the OP, therefore IMO she should do the right thing by the owners of the mares, if only to protect the foals. In a similar situation, if I had a mare out on loan with a view to being purchased by the loaner and came back in foal when she wasn't on breeding loan I couldn't and wouldn't just wash my hands of the foal, regardless of whether I wanted one or not. It would become my responsibilty. How do I know what she has or has not covered with my stallion or her other stallion - I don't have a crystal ball! I can't see how you can blame me at all - I sent my pony in good faith to be produced under saddle, the breed society have been aware right from the start... oh some of you are so judgemental, don't know why I bothered now. That is the last I will say on this matter until after the court judgement. I was just trying to warn mare owners! never mind just carry on with your lives! Some people are just delusional Jane, its in no way your fault at all and Im not sure how anyone could arrive at that conclusion tbh  |
|
Milliesmum
H G Addict
COCKERP00S RULE!!!
Posts: 23,901
|
Post by Milliesmum on Jan 10, 2013 17:57:51 GMT
Delusional?? I've heard it all now!!
|
|
|
|
Post by amumwithapony on Jan 10, 2013 18:24:17 GMT
I read very carefully through this thread when it was first posted and when questioned the OP said the arrangements were done via PM and messages. The OP has now stated that she has a contract drawn up and it is registered with the breed society so possibly the OP did have a loan agreement, a standard one which did not specify whether or not the animal was to be used for breeding. Therefore my point is and always was that a mare owner could have rung the breed society (though doubful as I said as most mare owners would take on face value that someone with a pony on their yard on laon was free to use it as they wished) and been told yes the stallion is on loan to the naughty Mrs X. If the OP did have a loan agreement srawn up that stated the animal was on ridden loan only AND it was registered to the breed society AND the person with him on loan was in the process of buying him then the person who had him on loan could, legally when purchased used him to cover mares. So the OP would have had no control over what stock ended up on the floor by him so I still can not see why she has to charge the mare owners a covering fee for a covering certificate if the foal is proved to be by this stallion via a DNA test. If that makes me delusional then I am sorry. If I were in the OPs situation then I would be keeping the issues between the OP and the loaner completely seperate from the mare owners who now have an unregisterable foal because of a disagreement between the OP and the loaner. I think it makes me honourable rather than delusional. Perhaps someone should ring Jeremy Kyle and get him to sort it out   ;D |
|
|
|
Post by amumwithapony on Jan 10, 2013 18:25:36 GMT
Did you have a contract in place? We were friends of many years, I thought I could trust her - we had an agreement via private messages and texts - the breed society have been aware from before she took him. It has all gone to small claims court now, they have all the messages and texts. There you go. Thats why I assumed there was no official agreement in place. |
|
|
|
Post by brindlerainbow on Jan 10, 2013 18:43:57 GMT
If the dodgy loaner has paid some of the money towards buying the pony then she is technically part owner unless her money has been returned........
As ever there are two sides to every story and at the moment we are only hearing one side.
I know Cayberry states the breed society were aware from before the loaner took the pony but what were they aware of? Was it just that the pony was on loan or was it more detailed in that the pony was on loan with view to buy and under no circumstances was it to be used for breeding until all money had been paid for and pony transferred to loaners name.
Of course Cayberry must be extremely upset that a woman that she had been very good friends with for many years and who she trusted with a prize winning stallion stitched her up so badly. Why on earth would a good friend do that I wonder
|
|
|
|
Post by crazychick on Jan 10, 2013 18:58:59 GMT
We were friends of many years, I thought I could trust her - we had an agreement via private messages and texts - the breed society have been aware from before she took him. It has all gone to small claims court now, they have all the messages and texts. There you go. Thats why I assumed there was no official agreement in place. In court - pm's/ texts stand as an official agreement. It is about a lot more than a stud fee! If the dodgy loaner has paid some of the money towards buying the pony then she is technically part owner unless her money has been returned........ As ever there are two sides to every story and at the moment we are only hearing one side. I know Cayberry states the breed society were aware from before the loaner took the pony but what were they aware of? Was it just that the pony was on loan or was it more detailed in that the pony was on loan with view to buy and under no circumstances was it to be used for breeding until all money had been paid for and pony transferred to loaners name. Of course Cayberry must be extremely upset that a woman that she had been very good friends with for many years and who she trusted with a prize winning stallion stitched her up so badly. Why on earth would a good friend do that I wonder With the breed society concerned, only the owner can write covering certificates, not the person loaning the pony unless stated with the society that the pony is on breeding loan. I think they probably thought they could make some easy money but didn't realise the rules that are in place. Therefore my point is and always was that a mare owner could have rung the breed society (though doubful as I said as most mare owners would take on face value that someone with a pony on their yard on laon was free to use it as they wished) and been told yes the stallion is on loan to the naughty Mrs X. This is exactly why the thread was started... to make people aware! |
|
|
|
Post by helle on Jan 10, 2013 19:18:59 GMT
We were friends of many years, I thought I could trust her - we had an agreement via private messages and texts - the breed society have been aware from before she took him. It has all gone to small claims court now, they have all the messages and texts. There you go. Thats why I assumed there was no official agreement in place. and why would that not constitute an 'official agreement' ? |
|
|
|
Post by elmere on Jan 10, 2013 20:37:09 GMT
Yes delusional!! If the stallion is sent out on RIDDEN loan then how would the owner know that this was going to happen, especially whilst with a friend so it is by no way their fault.
I am sure that Jane will not be attempting to ask for another stud fee if the mare owner has already paid one but instead trying to recuperate the fee from the loaner who will have been paid it in the first place we presume. Obviously a DNA test is required to prove that it is by that stallion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2013 18:31:47 GMT
Just to add, I got my judgement this week, 17th and the 'lady' in question has been ordered to pay me and mare owners dna tests etc..... so you see I WASN'T guilty as some of you had me! I won't hold my breathe for an apology....
|
|
;D