Why would a seller NOT allow a trial?

[Mandzanita]

So I found a horse for my friend to look at and she went and tried him out. She liked him alot but wanted to take him for a trial. The owner wasn't into that idea. Said she let him go out on trial last spring for 30 days and then took him back because she loved him too much to sell. Weird. Do you think not allowing a trial is always a bad thing? What are some valid reasons for not allowing a trial...I can already think of the shady reasons...

[cheval]

Yes it is a bad thing.

They may be hiding something about the horse. I haven't heard of anyone not willing to do a trial - usually they are about two weeks but I've seen them as long as a month.

[WashingtonBay]

There are perfectly valid reasons not to. Not wanting to risk getting an injured or lame horse back and no money, not wanting to be diddled around and your time wasted by someone who is not really serious about buying. I guess there's her reason too, though that's a weird one.

I love trial periods, but they are a risky proposition for the owner of the horse, there's no question about that. 30 days is too long. A week or two weeks tops is more fair to ask.

When we did the trial on Cyn I wrote her a check for the full asking price when we took her. It was on her word that she'd hold it for a week, and if we did not bring her back, or if anything at all happened to the horse, she'd cash it.

[dame_wolf]

I can't think of a good reason not to allow a trial... I bought Koda without a trial but then I bought him from a friend. Would have been no trouble if it hadn't worked out.

[dame_wolf]

That would make sense WB. I wouldn't want to get an injured horse back that could not be resold. Can they not do the trial period at the owners place? Just take the horse off the market and let the buyer come ride at any time for the next 2 weeks, observe the horse in a comfy setting (like the new place would eventually be)? If they are an honest seller then it shouldn't be a problem.

[Equine_Woman]

I wouldn't do a trial but I'd have a warranty or something on my horse. But I want cash, not check. There is too much risk in someone just taking off with your horse. I'd also be worried about them being injured. . . but I'd rather have them back injured then them go to a bad home.

[Reinmaker]

There are perfectly valid reasons not to. Not wanting to risk getting an injured or lame horse back and no money, not wanting to be diddled around and your time wasted by someone who is not really serious about buying. I guess there's her reason too, though that's a weird one.

I love trial periods, but they are a risky proposition for the owner of the horse, there's no question about that. 30 days is too long. A week or two weeks tops is more fair to ask.

When we did the trial on Cyn I wrote her a check for the full asking price when we took her. It was on her word that she'd hold it for a week, and if we did not bring her back, or if anything at all happened to the horse, she'd cash it.

All valid reasons. Also anytime someone is riding they are "training" on that horse. Some owners do not want a horse to leave their property and be in the full control of another person not only for care, but also for not knowing how they will be riding that horse. What if that horse comes back all freaked out or has developed a bad habit which could certainly happen in a 30 day period of time.

[natisha]

There are perfectly valid reasons not to. Not wanting to risk getting an injured or lame horse back and no money, not wanting to be diddled around and your time wasted by someone who is not really serious about buying. I guess there's her reason too, though that's a weird one.

I love trial periods, but they are a risky proposition for the owner of the horse, there's no question about that. 30 days is too long. A week or two weeks tops is more fair to ask.

When we did the trial on Cyn I wrote her a check for the full asking price when we took her. It was on her word that she'd hold it for a week, and if we did not bring her back, or if anything at all happened to the horse, she'd cash it. I couldn't agree more. I have never sold a horse but if I had to I would not do a trial period for the very reasons WB stated. Plus "I can guarantee this horse is trained, I can't guarantee you can ride it." I would offer lessons on the horse here & let them get used to each other.
Twice this summer I let a boarder use one of mine for 'experienced' friends. The first one kept such a tight rein all the time, constantly nagging. The second made it about 3 times around the arena before she fell off. She used way to much leg so the poor horse was flying around(because she was told to) the girl got scared, pulled on the reins, the horse stopped fast (because she was told to) the girl went over her head.
So if either of these people had taken the horse in a trial period it would not have worked, not the horses fault. I wouldn't want to put one of my horses through that.

I have never bought on a trial but I have never bought a trained horse either.

By the way, I no longer will borrow out my horse.

[Gliderider]

I have to agree with WB & reinmaker & natisha. Not allowing a trail period is not always bad nor does it mean the seller is hiding anything. I have never had a trail period with any horse I have bought. Nor do I offer a trail period for any I have sold. There is to much risk to the horse. I would not allow any horse of mine to leave my property without being paid for in full. Also I would not want a trail period of more then a few rides at my place. The reason being people are to sue happy these days. No one I know personally has ever had a trail period with a horse. The only thing I have had people offer and is what I offer as well. You can ride the horse a couple times to make up your mind but the horse might sell in that time except if you pay a non returnable deposit. Also a per-purchase exam is welcomed.

[Toodlestoo]

We did not allow a trial when we sold our horses for all of the reasons above. They were free to have a vet check and come and ride as long as the needed to feel comfortable as long as I was there. I did it for the welfare of the horse. Too many people just don't know what they're doing. Plus, who knows what diseases they would exposed to while off the property--strangles, etc.

[Mandzanita]

Thanks for all the input. I'm going to pass it on to my friend. I think she was under the impression that it was an odd sign and was a little put off by it. I thought the horse sounded great and if she liked him upon looking at him I don't want her to totally write him off because of the lack of a trial period. Then again, if a trial period is that important to her, maybe this isn't the horse for her.

[WashingtonBay]

What's her skill level? That would make a lot of difference to me... if there's any surprises when she gets the horse to a new environment, how skilled is she at handling those surprises?

[Palogal]

There are perfectly valid reasons not to. Not wanting to risk getting an injured or lame horse back and no money, not wanting to be diddled around and your time wasted by someone who is not really serious about buying. I guess there's her reason too, though that's a weird one.

I love trial periods, but they are a risky proposition for the owner of the horse, there's no question about that. 30 days is too long. A week or two weeks tops is more fair to ask.

When we did the trial on Cyn I wrote her a check for the full asking price when we took her. It was on her word that she'd hold it for a week, and if we did not bring her back, or if anything at all happened to the horse, she'd cash it.

Yeah, what she said.

I don't offer a trial. The prospective buyer can come ride and visit a few times. No horse leaves my land if I don't have cash in my hand. It's a bummer, but these days you have to be that way. I will hold the cash for a week and allow the horse to be returned if necessary but if something happens to the horse while off the property or I don't hear from the owner within a week...it stays in the bank.

[Mandzanita]

She's about my level, I'd say capable of dealing with issues if need be. Let's just say she took a 4 year old warmblood into an equitation class of 50 and got 2nd all while he was bucking and spooking at everything. I'll never forget that, lol. They got kicked out of the under saddle class because it was obvious he wasn't going to place but they kept her in the equitation class because the judge felt she handled herself with the horse that well. She would be able to deal with alot but the thing is I think she wants more of a "no-issue" type of horse nowadays. Something for just pleasure and fun.

[WashingtonBay]

I understand the desire for a horse who doesn't threaten to kill us at some stage in life, I'm there! I've had my share of challenges, and I'd rather not anymore!

See if, short of a trial, the woman will trailer him someplace the horse has never been for a joint ride... either a trail, or a nearby public arena, depending on what's available and what makes sense for what your friend would like to do. She still may not, there's risks associated with that too, but if she's a motivated seller and she's confident in the horse, she may be willing.

[mandisue]

We havent' allowed trials before because mostly, if the person isnt' right next door once that horse is in their hands you have no idea what will be done with it, so if something happens, Example, they take it to a sale to make $, or the horse were to get injured and they not get a vet out, etc. OR someone could come that would want the horse and you wouldn't have it, then the people on trial end up not wanting it you're out a sale.

[cheval]

Actually, trials include (or very well should) what needs to happen if there is an injury to the horse. In this day and age, people shouldn't just take a horse on an owner's good word. Sad but true. Unless the person has an impeccable reputation and even then, I wouldn't try a horse without a trial.

You just cannot know if you are really going to gel with a horse in one day.

The trials our BO has done have involved what she and/or the party would be responsible for if something happened to the horse. And it's never been something that would be disagreeable to the party looking to buy.

[JetLagaside]

I'm another one that would never let a horse go out on trial - there are just to many things that can go wrong. I'd let someone come and ride a few times but that's about it.

[cheval]

I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that wouldn't mind not having a trial, but boy I'm not one of them. No way no how. There's just as much risk on the part of the buyer to get a horse without a trial as there is to the owner.

And most people do pay the full price before the horse goes out with the understanding (in writing) that it is a trial and the full amount will be refunded if the horse doesn't fit or doesn't pass the vet check.

[vicklynn]

I wouldnt do a trial for all the reasons posted before hand.
Had I sold City, it would of been, you come, you ride, you take home. No letting my horse out of my site unknowing of the person buying it. To much of a risk to me. IF I knew the person, maybe then I would do a trial, but thats the only way.
Its the same way when I buy. I ride, I take home. The only condition for me is a neg coggins. If it comes up poss, then the horse goes back.

[IrisGreen]

I got Matty on a 2 week trail and everything went fine but that's not every case.

My neighbor sold her jumper for 20k on a month trail period. Not only did she have to transport him 2 hours to the lady but turns out the lady just rode him and then decided she couldn't afford the payments on the loan she took out to get him. My neighbor then had to go get the horse, pay to have him re-listed and deal with the lady saying how she loved him and she really wanted to keep him but couldn't afford him and bla bla.

Now the lady is sueing my neighbor because she took out the transportation and other expenses from her deposit on the gelding. The lady wants all her money back like she never got the horse and had him for a full month riding him and showing him off to all her friends.

There was a contract so my neighbor should be covered and compensated for her expenses she is out because the lady backed out of the deal, not because there was anything wrong with the horse but because she couldn't afford the payments.

Also another good reason for a trail period and contract is I have heard of people drugging horses just before the prospective buyer comes to see and ride it. The horse does great, nice and calm so they buy it. Take it home and once the drugs wear off it's a nut case and not the horse they thought they paid good money for.

So, you do have to be very careful. You just never know who you are dealing with..it's sad but it happens to good people.

[cheval]

All that stuff has to be spelled out completely before the horse leaves the property.

I'm curious for those of you that wouldn't do trials, isn't there a concern that the horse won't fit your needs later? And if that is the case, do you just assume that you'd sell it and find another one? Seems to me as a buyer it's too much of a risk to take a horse after spending so little time with it.

When our BO got a horse for a two week trial from eastern Oregon it was agreed that if the horse was returned that cost would come from the BO not the seller. Everyone was happy with that and the BO ended up keeping the horse.

I just wouldn't want to bring a horse home and then find out that it wasn't what really meshed with me after the horse got settled and you really started seeing it in it's comfort zone.

We've had people up here that have had drugged horses during the purchase part. Not fun to get the horse home and find out not only did it pass the vet exam because of the drugs but the horse is crazy AND lame. :doh:

[Reinmaker]

The short answer is yes, if for some reason it does not work out that horse still has value to someone else and should be able to be sold.

However, my advice to anyone that is looking for horse should seek the help of a professional to help them unless they have a lot of experience. Because if the buyer is totally duped and the horse is lame or a nutcase that has been drugged (seen that happen too) then it definitely does not have the value that the buyer most likely paid for it.

Mandi, if your friend has a check about the horse or the seller I would advise her to hold off and maybe go back and ride him again and see how she feels a second time around. And then maybe ask for what WB suggested. I however would tell her that it isn't that uncommon for someone to deny a trial.

[cheval]

Seems like a lot of effort and risk to try and resale a horse (especially in this day and age) when a simple two week trial (even if the horse stayed on the buyer's property) could be done.

[Reinmaker]

Why should the seller take the horse off the market for that period of time so you can decide if you want them all the while still searching the sale ads and possible looking for something better?

A trial at the sellers place. That is just coming to ride and within reason I would allow that, but I wouldn't take the horse off the market and if someone showed up liked the horse and had cash in hand it would be theirs.

Trials off property are to risky IMO. I wouldn't expect one and wouldn't give one. Nothing wrong with the horse market for good horses.

[vicklynn]

I guess when I buy, Ive searched enough to feel comfortable with my purchase.

When I went to look at Myst, beings she was a distance, I felt comfortable enough to take the trailer. Bought her, took her home, had her vet check, she came clean(I knew she would), worked her issues out after a time, and she is way better than having to re work City who has had Pro green broke training.

Ive never asked for a trial. I think its because Ive never bought a horse I felt did not fit my needs, or that I could not turn around.

I just remembered. I had a horse that was on trial, sort of. This lady came to the barn, wanted to buy my mare that was for sale. Knowing where my mare had been, I had her try her out for some time first. They bonded, I sold her the mare. I did that with one of my geldings too. These people had to come to me though. The horse did not leave the property. There were many many trails to be riden right where I was. Both horses came from bad experiences. Thats why I was so choosy.
Any other horse, nope, sold them out right.

[Palogal]

There also liability issues with allowing a horse to be taken off the property to a boarding facility even. If the horses causes damage, the BO can hold you responsible for it or injury to someone else. How do you know when the lawsuit comes that the child broke her arm because your horse kicked her or she was skateboarding? Too much uncertainty.

As long as I am the legal owner of the horse, he does not leave my sight. Period. Come visit, come ride and sign my liability release. When I sign the bill of sale, take the horse. That also means all vet checks are done before the horse leaves as well. Any buyer is welcome to have one done, but I will be there when it is done by whomever the buyer chooses.

[oursarge]

All valid reasons. Also anytime someone is riding they are "training" on that horse. Some owners do not want a horse to leave their property and be in the full control of another person not only for care, but also for not knowing how they will be riding that horse. What if that horse comes back all freaked out or has developed a bad habit which could certainly happen in a 30 day period of time.

My friend will not let a horse out on a trial period. She guarantees every horse she sells. If you want to try the horse out it stays at her place and you can ride it there as much as you want. She will help you with riding or what ever you need but the horse will not leave her property until it is paid for in full. She wants to make sure you aren't messing up a good horse or hurting the horse then sending it back to her after it's injured and she has to deal with getting it healthy again. Her main concern is the horse, I've seen her pull someone off of a horse who was pulling on it's mouth too much, I've seen her refuse to sell a horse so someone if she didn't think it would be taken care of right. I had never even heard of a trail period until I started to read about them here. I really do worry about someone taking the horse home and it gets hurt then they say it's lame or what ever they don't want it when it was perfectly fine when it left your barn then you are stuck with the vet bills and a messed up horse. I don't know anyone here who does trial periods where the horse leaves their place.

[Country Girl 43]

I had never even considered a trial period when buying a horse. Now when we got Missy, the owner took a deposit and allowed us to go out to her place as often as we wanted to let the kids ride. We did this for 2 weeks and then paid the balance on Missy. The owner promised she would not sell Missy to anyone till we made a decision.

Now Joe.... the lady was offering a "Free Lease" because she wasn't sure if she wanted to out right sell him. We signed a 6 month contract with the option to buy if she decided to sell. In the contract it also stated that if anything happened to Joe while in my care I would have to pay for him in full even if he died. She delivered Joe to us and even offered to get him when I had my wreck on him. After seeing the pictures and videos of Joe and Cheyenne she knew those two were meant for each other and said we could buy him at any time. I waited 5 months before I actually paid for him.

There is a "catch" to these two horses though. :rolleyes: I am also a member on 2 local forums and these owners are also on the forums. So even though we never met in person till I was looking at horses, the owners practically knew me from posting on the forums.

It's almost like this forum. I would have no hesitation doing a trial period for many of the members here, but I would not do it for a complete stranger.

[AppyLover]

Never knew trials existed. I actually found the idea shocking. I hate to put it this way but I find a trial period a gimmick for a buyer to back out of a deal with their conscience in tact. They think they are a better rider or what ever than they actually are find a pretty horse and realize it is to much horse, they then take it back to the owner with some excuse, like we did not click or making up some imaginary lameness etc....In my opinion no one is going to instantly bond with a horse in two weeks, just not going to happen, and as a buyer you have to be honest about your skills and comfort levels and look at horses that fit, not horses you hope will fit. And as for lameness it can happen to any horse at any time, if you are really that worried about it; get a vet check and be sure. If there are any doubts about the integrity of the seller; walk away. Personal opinion: simple as that.

(And before people jump on me about bonding times....The seller I bought Abby from said there was an instant connection between us and sold her to me instead of the experienced show rider coming to see her later...darn horse still dislocated my hip a month later. True bonding takes time.)

[Country Girl 43]

(And before people jump on me about bonding times....The seller I bought Abby from said there was an instant connection between us and sold her to me instead of the experienced show rider coming to see her later...darn horse still dislocated my hip a month later. True bonding takes time.)

And THAT is why I waited 5 months to buy Joe. :D Yep he broke my ribs, but he sure takes care of Chy. Even if she does fall off him..... :hysterical:

[vicklynn]

(And before people jump on me about bonding times....The seller I bought Abby from said there was an instant connection between us and sold her to me instead of the experienced show rider coming to see her later...darn horse still dislocated my hip a month later. True bonding takes time.)

A connection and a bond are 2 different things though.
Im glad your ok now though.

When I said the buyer and my horse bonded, it was not instantly, that IS NOT a bond.
She rode my horse for quite some time before I sold her the mare. I think a month or 2. She gained 50 more lbs before she left the club. They were a great team. I loved that mare. I hated selling her.

[rocknK]

Haven't read all the posts. Hope this hasn't already been mentioned. I think the seller is afraid to let the horse out on trial because the dope will wear off. That's why some horses go "lame" when they are on trial. Then the "owner" blames the potential buyer. When I was horse shopping I had narrowed my decision down to two geldings. One Saturday I call up both sellers & told them I was coming back out to make a final choice. One told me his horse wasn't "ready". I took that to mean "hadn't been doped" & bought the other gelding.

[WashingtonBay]

Never knew trials existed. I actually found the idea shocking. I hate to put it this way but I find a trial period a gimmick for a buyer to back out of a deal with their conscience in tact. They think they are a better rider or what ever than they actually are find a pretty horse and realize it is to much horse, they then take it back to the owner with some excuse, like we did not click or making up some imaginary lameness etc....In my opinion no one is going to instantly bond with a horse in two weeks, just not going to happen, and as a buyer you have to be honest about your skills and comfort levels and look at horses that fit, not horses you hope will fit.

AL - I think buyers who want a trial period are trying to do just that; get a horse who is really within their abilities to handle, not one who was good in the comfort of their own home but too strong or too squirrelly in a new place or with new handlers. They are being honest about their skills and they don't want to be stuck with a horse they aren't suited to handle.

Sometimes it takes getting them away from home and away from the prior owner to know that. Obviously people who are highly skilled and OK with buying green or untrained horses won't worry about that stuff nearly as much. They're already planning on training the horse.

We wanted a trial because my husband was basically a beginner when we were looking at his horse. Riding her in her home paddock, she seemed great. But I wanted him to have a horse he could handle anywhere, so we wanted a trial to see if she was that horse. She was. Good thing! I didn't want to have to train his horse, I wanted her to be his. We didn't want to end up with a horse he couldn't ride and trust on trail.

Nothing wrong with that goal. It's an honest one. But I don't think it's dishonest either, if an owner doesn't want to take the risk too. IMHO, both parties have interests that are valid even if they're not always the same.

[Flair]

I was fortunate in that Mitch's previous owners allowed me to take him for a 15 day trial. They even brought him over for me. Of course, they were very reputable being a therapeutic riding center, and they knew people who knew me (one of their best volunteers is one of my barn buddies, and her POA mare is Mitch's neighbor.) They had nothing to hide, and nothing to lose with him being off the market while on trial. He'd been on the market for some 8 or 9 months with no takers (we're a very horse oriented town, but he's not the type of horse/breed people like, it's either TBs, Warmbloods or QHs or gaited breeds)

In any case, I signed paperwork, and left a check payable in the entire amount which they wouldn't cash until after I decided whether I wanted him or not. It worked out really nicely.

However, I could also see why people wouldn't let horses go out on trial. If people do their homework and make sure they have good contracts, that's one thing, but I've read plenty of trainwrecks where things didn't work out so hot. A seller always has more to lose than a buyer, so they have to be careful.

[miatapony]

i belive there are time where a trial is ok .. like with show horses ... that way you as the buyer can take them to a show and show them ... but for a trail horse ... get on them and ride them if they are what the owner says they are then your set .. like with Runner that was the first time he was ever out at Gaiteds place and he was ok mom what now ... that to me is what kind of horse i would be looking for to buy.

[AppyLover]

I can see your point, and I do agree that it is valid. I am just stating my opinions off of my own experience and when I purchased Abby (almost 10 years ago) there was no options to try before you buy. And even with the injuries I sustained after purchase if a trial would have been offered she was perfect her first three weeks as mine; it was that last week that should have landed me in the hospital.

I can see points for and against, but I personally would not do or offer one. But I will admit I am the type of person who will purchase what I like and then deal with everything else afterwards, and I am okay with that, others are not that way and that is okay too.


AL - I think buyers who want a trial period are trying to do just that; get a horse who is really within their abilities to handle, not one who was good in the comfort of their own home but too strong or too squirrelly in a new place or with new handlers. They are being honest about their skills and they don't want to be stuck with a horse they aren't suited to handle.

Sometimes it takes getting them home and away from the prior owner to know that. Obviously people who are highly skilled and OK with buying green or untrained horses won't worry about that stuff nearly as much. They're already planning on training the horse.

We wanted a trial because my husband was basically a beginner when we were looking at his horse. Riding her in her home paddock, she seemed great. But I wanted him to have a horse he could handle anywhere, so we wanted a trial to see if she was that horse. She was. Good thing! I didn't want to have to train his horse, I wanted her to be his. We didn't want to end up with a horse he couldn't ride and trust on trail.

Nothing wrong with that goal. It's an honest one. But I don't think it's dishonest either, if an owner doesn't want to take the risk too. IMHO, both parties have interests that are valid even if they're not always the same.

[Vegashorselady]

I never got a trial period with any of my horses and honeslty the issues that did pop up wouldn't have been discovered in two weeks. Blue waited 7 months to show me his evil side, lol!

However, the one time I sold a horse we worked out short term lease so she could try the horse out. Basically, the horse stayed on the property and the buyer leased the horse and paid his expenses for the two months, the money from the lease would be applied to the purchase price of the horse if she bought him. If she chose not to purchase the horse she would not be refunded. It worked out well and she ended up purchasing the horse.

Personally though, when I buy a horse if I want it I want it NOW!

[quest]

I agree, there are perfectly valid reasons not too, and I personally wouldn't let my horses out for a trial. First off you have no way of knowing how your horse is being treated while you are gone. Also, if I get my horse back in two weeks, thats two weeks I couldn't get my horse sold. You also have no control of who is riding the horse and what they are doing and if you have put a lot of effort into the training of a horse, that training can become undone pretty quick. I just wouldn't want to risk lending my horse out for a couple weeks- if someone got hurt, I could get in trouble, and if the horse got hurt (contracts aren't always a guarentee you are safe), I would be out completely. As long as the horse didn't sell though I would be ok with someone coming back a few times to ride again, and as mentioned, for a show horse woI would consider allowing the person to try them at the show with limitations and conditions

[lovesfortune]

Why should the seller take the horse off the market for that period of time so you can decide if you want them all the while still searching the sale ads and possible looking for something better?

A trial at the sellers place. That is just coming to ride and within reason I would allow that, but I wouldn't take the horse off the market and if someone showed up liked the horse and had cash in hand it would be theirs.

Trials off property are to risky IMO. I wouldn't expect one and wouldn't give one. Nothing wrong with the horse market for good horses.

I agree with your 100% Reinmaker.