Use the navigation bar above to access articles and more discussions on this topic.
| Author |
Message |
    
Janet Schmidt
Member
Username: Sparky
Post Number: 27
Registered: 9-2002
| | Posted on Monday, Sep 9, 2002 - 4:57 pm: |   |
I hope this is the right place to post this - here goes - my gelding was boarded at a stable and was turned out in the pasture with other horses - he became attached to a mare and started separating her from the rest of the group - the stable owner was aware of the situation and did not separate the horses - she was there on the day he got kicked and watched it happen - and admitted that she had thought of separating them the day before but did not - 24 hrs too late - his rear splint bone was shattered and had to be removed and infection was a serious problem - the vet bills are over 8900.00 and we are not finished yet - she thought she only had mortality insurance and at one point we thought we would lose him and I asked her to start the procedure for the insurance claim - it turned out she had stable management insurance - up to 10,000.00 per incident - the insurance company is now saying that they find her liable - which she admits - but that they are holding the horse 50% liable for his actions!! Has anyone ever heard of this?? I suppose I should look at the cup being half full BUT hey how does the horse determine to put himself in a separate pasture that day?? I am wondering if anyone has any helpful hints with dealing with the insurance people? Thanks Janet Schmidt |
Robert N. Oglesby DVM
Moderator
Username: Dro
Post Number: 6881
Registered: 1-1997
| | Posted on Tuesday, Sep 10, 2002 - 6:35 am: | |
Just because horses are interacting with each other would not be an indication for removing one or the other. Nobody can predict the future. It is easy in the remorse of the event to be overly hard on ones self using the 20-20 of hindsight. The question is what actions did she observe and how predictive of future actions were they. Concerning the insurance companies stance she is liable... just because you might think about separating 2 horses and then decide not to is probably not legal grounds for liability.
I am not sure how being liable effects coverage. Just because the lightening caused damage does not mean my insurance company is not contractually responsible. These questions are legal ones so best to seek a lawyer familiar with your local laws.
DrO
|
Dawn Friesen
Member
Username: Dartanyn
Post Number: 99
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, Sep 10, 2002 - 10:46 am: | |
Janet, for my insurance experience - NOT related to animal applications; an "accident" can have contributing factors. In vehicle insurance, there can be a shared liability when the actions of one driver contributed to the severity of the occurrence - even if that driver would otherwise be considered fault-free. For instance: driver A stops behind legally parked vehicles in a parking lot to adjust a child's seat and straighten other items in the vehicle, driver B is in one of the legally parked vehicles and starts to back up after checking mirrors & cannot see driver A stopped across the back of the vehicle. Driver B is at fault, but driver A contributed to the incident severity by "parking" in a no-parking area and in such a way as to not typically be expected. The point is that Yes, the "kicking" incident did occur; however, the severity of the damage was more in the horses' control than the stable owner. Thereby "contributory negligence" might be assessed. That's the clinical way of looking at insurance; the emotional side quite often feels much different - and I am very sorry for the experience. Having been rehabilitating an expensive and extensive injury on my horse, I only wish any sort of insurance could have been involved. Hope all goes well with recovery. Dawn |
