Horses On The Roads - What's the Law?

[King Fisher]

Hi folks, can't disclose much info right now, but what exactly is the law regarding horses on the road? I know the highway code states to slow down and give them a wide birth, but is the highway code actually law in itself? If not, is there a specific law referring to horses and how they should be approached on the road? Any help would be great!

Thanks,

Tony

[Busa mav]

Don't know about the law , but approach with common sense would be a good starter .

Unfortunately not many people seem to be blessed with that nowadays , we see some diabolical acts of inconsiderate driving around horses .

Hope the beast is ok .

[paintman]

Highway Code is advice to road users, some of which is law - the relevant Act & Section is shown - & some is what could best be described as 'best practice'.
Bear in mind that the relevant bit of Highway Code will be used in the event of an incident to show that the offender was behaving in a manner that fell below an acceptable standard.
As you have given no details, in the event of a vehicle being involved in an incident consideration may also be given to offences of dangerous/careless/inconsiderate driving

[Fer]

(Watches with interest, as this is an issue on the roads around home).

[liner33]

Having seen a horse vs car accident when i was a child its something that sticks in your mind and ensures you always give them a very wide berth.

Many horse riders dont help themselves often see riders two a breast around here and we have lots of racehorse stables and those things are really skittish , not unusual for them to jink all over the road with no warning

[JumboBeef]

King Fisher said:

but is the highway code actually law in itself?

If the HWC says 'MUST' then it is the law.

[Mr_annie_vxr]

Nothing specific as far as I know. However. Careless and dangerous driving could be evidenced depending in circumstances and by using the HWC as the basis of what a careful and competent driver would do or should do etc.

[Mill Wheel]

IIUC there is a LAW which while not specific to horses would cover most situations on the road.
Driving with Due Care and Attention.

[Derek Smith]

In general horses have a right to be on a road, unlike motor vehicles. Most traffic law is regulatory and, in the nature of things, regulatory of vehicles.

Most horsey legislation is local and historical, going back to the later 19th c and a little beyond.

Most law relating to horses does not specify them. So unnecessary obstruction applies to the rider but if the essence is that the horse is parked badly then it is an offence.

Horse have not right on a footpath, that part of the road put by for the use of pedestrians. However, most police officers will not prosecute for such an offence as it gets horses off the road.

Although you can drive a horse I suppose, dangerous, careless and inconsiderate doesn't apply (or rather didn't in my day and I don't think the legislation has changed) but there is an offence of drunk in charge of a horse. The only case I know about in my old force was for a horse being led through a town but it would have applied if the drunk had been riding it.

Damage caused by horses in accidents can be tremendous. I've seen a Mini that was totalled when a horse sat on it. I have also seen a car, a small Datsun, that was kicked by a horse and that too was written off. It was something of a cause celebre where I used to live as there were two riding schools that caused lots of problems on the road.

In neither case was the rider of the horse prosecuted and both drivers - the Mini was parked - claimed on their own insurance.

There was talk about compulsory insurance but I've heard nothing more.

Where I live now there are four riding stables and three of them carry 3rd party insurance and make a big thing about it.

So very limited legislation with regards to horse riders. There are some with regards to harse drawn vehicle but I assume that is not what you are asking about.

[anonymous-user]

Derek Smith said:

There are some with regards to harse drawn vehicle but I assume that is not what you are asking about.

Is that a deliberate typo Derek? Some might think you were referring to certain non-settled types...

[Noger]

In terms of liability, Burns v Elliot deals with overtaking a horse too close.

[Noger]

doogz said:

Well that was a bit silly. Whoever is in charge of the horse at the time, whether or not they are the owner, is liable for it's actions. Which is why we demand all liverys have at least 3rd party insurance, so if i'm leading a horse up the road from a field, and it sits on someone's car, i'm not in the st.

Not so, the rider would not be liable if they had no reason to suspect the horse would behave as it did.

TP liability is as much for people falling off as anything else.

[Derek Smith]

doogz said:

Well that was a bit silly. Whoever is in charge of the horse at the time, whether or not they are the owner, is liable for it's actions. Which is why we demand all liverys have at least 3rd party insurance, so if i'm leading a horse up the road from a field, and it sits on someone's car, i'm not in the st.

Indeed. I was only reporting. The owner of the Mini, a woman of about 25, put it in the hands of her insurance company and they went for the easy option. She was philosophical. The case with the horse that kicked seven bells out of the Datsun was contested and from what I can remember there were injuries to the horse and counter claims. I didn't know anyone involved in that one so only read about it.

As an aside, the woman whose Mini was sat on said that when she returned to her car and found the damage she had a reality failure. She could not understand why the roof was pressed down.

There was no note left on the car, the rider just rode away. A witness came forward and gave a description of the horse - big arse was one bit no doubt - and she went to the local stables and found someone examining it for injuries.

There was no requirement for the person riding the horse to admit it although threats to the stables resulted in names, etc. It was a small village and it didn't take all that long for the rider to be ID'ed.

I must say that the stables, or at least most of them, around my way are very responsible and avoid routes that would cause congestion in the rush hour. Other times it is no real aggravation. You might have to wait a couple of minutes or so but that's ok. When they have learners they have a walker at the front, one at the back and at least one at the side.

But don't start me on horse boxes.

I cycle off-road and it would appear there are problems with bridleway usage. Horses will use fields to gallop or trot in, much to the irritation of farmers. This is not the stables' fault, these are individual riders. Most riders take care and are reasonable though.

[Regiment]

From talking to a girl i used to date, who owned her own stables and horses, the rider and the horse need to be insured for just such occurances so if the horse does inflict damage to a car or injures a pedestrian or the rider falls, they claim on the insurance...not sure if you'd claim against the rider or the horse but i presume it would be dependant on the horse being ridden or not.

I'm sure someone more knowledgable would probably state the opposite but that's what i understand from a girl i barely date for more than a few weeks.

[King Fisher]

Ok guys, thanks for the info. It's an on going case, but basically my son is under investigation for careless driving after he stopped for a few horse riders (who I may add flagged him down), they abused him for the volume of his exhaust, then one started to prance towards his car, at which point he removed himself from the situation. Apparently because he accelerated away from the horse, it spooked it. Where does he stand?

[Noger]

At the front end

Have they made a complaint to the police ?

[anonymous-user]

King Fisher said:

Ok guys, thanks for the info. It's an on going case, but basically my son is under investigation for careless driving after he stopped for a few horse riders (who I may add flagged him down), they abused him for the volume of his exhaust, then one started to prance towards his car, at which point he removed himself from the situation. Apparently because he accelerated away from the horse, it spooked it. Where does he stand?

He has nothing to worry about. What the fk would the horsey ponces do if (god forbid) a motorcycle came past, or a tractor, or maybe a helicopter flew over at low altitude? Or a dog barked at them? Or a crow-scarer went off whilst they were using their right to go wherever they liked? "Everybody be quiet because I am riding Trojan/Monty/Wallpaper Paste and nobody is allowed to scare my horse"

As long as his car was legal, I would drive backwards and forwards all day long, at the speed limit, in second gear - exercising my right to use my fully legal vehicle on the road.

Just because they have got a very expensive hobby, does not mean your boy has to kowtow to them. If you are followed by a RR Phantom, do you pull over in order to avoid stone chips to his bonnet? Nope - it's taken as read that he accepts the risks on the road the moment he sets out - and it's the same with horses. The owner is deemed to be capable of assessing risks. You are legally allowed to walk horses two-abreast down the A1. However, you'd be bloody suicidal to do it. If the horse owner wants to do it, then they won't last long, regardless of who is in the right.

In fact, fk em. Horseboxes hold up hundreds of people every day, because they don't want to scare their precious cargo. I don't want to be stuck behind you breathing your filthy diesel smoke and being held up because you can't handle the size of the wagon. I'll overtake, and if that scares your horses, that's YOUR tough st. Grr. Horses. Bloody pie-pets.

[Wings]

King Fisher said:

Ok guys, thanks for the info. It's an on going case, but basically my son is under investigation for careless driving after he stopped for a few horse riders (who I may add flagged him down), they abused him for the volume of his exhaust, then one started to prance towards his car, at which point he removed himself from the situation. Apparently because he accelerated away from the horse, it spooked it. Where does he stand?

Inconsiderate, driving without due care and attention, this following event slightly to the extreme, but how courts view animals and inconsiderate road users.

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/850486-firefighters-si...

[anonymous-user]

Wings said:

Inconsiderate, driving without due care and attention, this following event slightly to the extreme, but how courts view animals and inconsiderate road users.

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/850486-firefighters-si...

What an absolute joke.

[King Fisher]

Wings said:

Inconsiderate, driving without due care and attention, this following event slightly to the extreme, but how courts view animals and inconsiderate road users.

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/850486-firefighters-si...

Holy cow (excuse the pun), that's a little harsh on the fireman.

And he's just rung me to tell me he has an interview under caution tomorrow at 5pm. He's in full time education; will he be entitled to a duty solicitor?