Horse Kicked Dog
Discussion
Mrs FMC had an incident whereby she and a friend were out with another friend, two on horse back, and one walking the two dogs.
Mrs FMC was on her newly acquired three year old racer. Dogs off lead one got kicked. Serious injuries, lots of operations.
All people involved are horsey types, so know the dangers.
The owner of dog (who was riding) is now trying to sue for costs from us.
As I see it, the walker of the dogs has acted negligently in so far as she did not have effective control of the dog whom got kicked. I am covered from an insurance point of view.
Whom do the PH Massiv see as to blame?
I am also interested to see what the PH massiv think about the solicitor acting on the claimants behalf they are employed by an insurance company where the claimant works, even though no insurance is in place. What rules apply to solicitors? The insurance company do not have a policy for the claimant in place.
Thoughts.?
Mrs FMC was on her newly acquired three year old racer. Dogs off lead one got kicked. Serious injuries, lots of operations.
All people involved are horsey types, so know the dangers.
The owner of dog (who was riding) is now trying to sue for costs from us.
As I see it, the walker of the dogs has acted negligently in so far as she did not have effective control of the dog whom got kicked. I am covered from an insurance point of view.
Whom do the PH Massiv see as to blame?
I am also interested to see what the PH massiv think about the solicitor acting on the claimants behalf they are employed by an insurance company where the claimant works, even though no insurance is in place. What rules apply to solicitors? The insurance company do not have a policy for the claimant in place.
Thoughts.?
I'm a dog owner and am used to seeing, passing and being passed by horses. I've taken the view that if my less than perfectly behaved dog gets kicked my a less than perfectly well behaved horse that that's life, it just happens. If my dog should snap at the back of a horse or dart around the back of the horse that's her fault if she gets kicked and it's the fault of the horse if the horse is lairy and the dog's behaving itself. There's all sorts of shades of grey, but as you've described it I reckon the dog owner will be hard pushed to make a case - she was not in control of her dog and being a rider she knew the risks of a dog getting kicked.
If I remember rightly horses dont usually kick unless someone/something is causing the horse a degree of stress.
So if the horse is stressed, then I would be asking the dog owner what made your horse stressed enough to get kicked.
If there had been adeqate control then the situation would not have happened, so the fact the person suing didnt have them on a leash would be the first point, stressing out the horse would be a 2nd point.
Asking them what their horse would do if it was being stressed out in the same way, if they come up with any BS about it ignoring the dog, then they are lying.
Would also be asking what the person suing thought when having dogs around a relatively new racer (so is probably not used to dogs in that case)?
So if the horse is stressed, then I would be asking the dog owner what made your horse stressed enough to get kicked.
If there had been adeqate control then the situation would not have happened, so the fact the person suing didnt have them on a leash would be the first point, stressing out the horse would be a 2nd point.
Asking them what their horse would do if it was being stressed out in the same way, if they come up with any BS about it ignoring the dog, then they are lying.
Would also be asking what the person suing thought when having dogs around a relatively new racer (so is probably not used to dogs in that case)?
http://www.henmansfreeth.co.uk/equine_q_and_a
article said:
As an owner/rider you owe a duty of care to others. Failing to discharge that duty may result a claim against you in negligence. If you or your horse were to injure a dog, then, you may find yourself facing a claim in damages. It may be a defence (again under the Animals Act 1971) to show that you were acting to protect livestock which the dog was worrying, again including horses. If you were trespassing at the time, however, this defence may not be available.
Where an accident appears to have been caused by more than one party liability will, generally speaking, be divided between them in proportion to their responsibility for it. An injured party whose actions contribute to their own injury may have their damages reduced as a result.
Turning to the specific question, if a horse were to react particularly badly to a barking dog, resulting in injury to either or both, a complex claim could result.
The horse owner could point to the dog owner’s failure to keep the dog under proper control and may have a claim against them either in negligence for worrying livestock under the legislation referred to above.
The dog owner may well rely on the horse’s reaction to dogs to defend the claim. Furthermore, any failure properly to control/desensitise a horse could form the basis of a separate negligence claim against the rider/owner. All of the circumstances would be taken into account in assessing liability.
Where an accident appears to have been caused by more than one party liability will, generally speaking, be divided between them in proportion to their responsibility for it. An injured party whose actions contribute to their own injury may have their damages reduced as a result.
Turning to the specific question, if a horse were to react particularly badly to a barking dog, resulting in injury to either or both, a complex claim could result.
The horse owner could point to the dog owner’s failure to keep the dog under proper control and may have a claim against them either in negligence for worrying livestock under the legislation referred to above.
The dog owner may well rely on the horse’s reaction to dogs to defend the claim. Furthermore, any failure properly to control/desensitise a horse could form the basis of a separate negligence claim against the rider/owner. All of the circumstances would be taken into account in assessing liability.
Please tell more about the claimant's solicitor. Is he or she a friend doing the case as a favour? A solicitor employed by an insurance company might or might not have a current practising certificate but would not usually be insured to conduct a case that is not one of the company's cases. A solicitor being paid to work for a client should have insurance, should send a client care letter, and all that.
You could ask the solicitor to state the professional basis on which he or she is acting.
Neither I nor any other lawyer can advise reliably on the case itself because the facts stated are far too scanty. You should not rely on the well meant but unqualified opinions above, as they are based on inadequate facts. On the brief summary given, it cannot be stated as an absolute that the horse owner either is or is not liable to the dog owner.
You could ask the solicitor to state the professional basis on which he or she is acting.
Neither I nor any other lawyer can advise reliably on the case itself because the facts stated are far too scanty. You should not rely on the well meant but unqualified opinions above, as they are based on inadequate facts. On the brief summary given, it cannot be stated as an absolute that the horse owner either is or is not liable to the dog owner.
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 27th May 15:33
Breadvan72 said:
Please tell more about the claimant's solicitor. Is he or she a friend doing the case as a favour? A solicitor employed by an insurance company might or might not have a current practising certificate but would not usually be insured to conduct a case that is not one of the company's cases. A solicitor being paid t work for a client should have insurance, should send a client care letter, and all that.
My Ins company knew the persons name - but he said to me he couldn't remember where from - he was surprised when I mentioned a name of a company. He was surprised she was doing it. It is where the claimant works, along with the head of public liability / solicitor.My Insurance company have got a signed form saying the claimant gives authority for her to act for her etc.
I certainly wouldn't be working on the side, Shirley it is worth more than her job?
Breadvan72 said:
Authority to act is not the issue. The question is whether the solicitor is acting in accordance with professional rules, and also with the consent of his or her employer.
Apologies - unsure at this moment. My broker and the specialist at the underwriters found it strange.Is it worth me just calling up and asking the HR department?
I am not going to hold back on this.
Our insurers are of the mind just to pass the claim onto the person responsible for the dog.
Would she have looked to herself if it had been her horse that kicked the dog?
I really do despair at how the rights/compensation/litigation culture seems to seep into every fibre of life. Even an afternoon stroll.
I have no idea who is legally responsible, if indeed anyone is, but I'm guessing they won't be friends any more.
Silver lining and all that.
The one I feel sorry for is the dog.
I really do despair at how the rights/compensation/litigation culture seems to seep into every fibre of life. Even an afternoon stroll.
I have no idea who is legally responsible, if indeed anyone is, but I'm guessing they won't be friends any more.
Silver lining and all that.
The one I feel sorry for is the dog.
Edited by IanA2 on Tuesday 27th May 16:41
Petrol Only said:
Breadvan72 said:
That's put yer foot in it.
Nothing can compare with the classic horse vs TVR thread(s)of yore. I wounder what happened to Twunty TVR t
t?
Link please good sir. Nothing can compare with the classic horse vs TVR thread(s)of yore. I wounder what happened to Twunty TVR t
t? 
IanA2 said:
Would she have looked to herself if it had been her horse that kicked the dog?
I really do despair at how the rights/compensation/litigation culture seems to seep into every fibre of life. Even an afternoon stroll.
I have no idea how is legally responsible, if indeed anyone is, but I'm guessing they won't be friends any more.
Silver lining and all that.
The one I feel sorry for is the dog.
Yes, we feel sorry for the dog, especially as it has been put through so much.I really do despair at how the rights/compensation/litigation culture seems to seep into every fibre of life. Even an afternoon stroll.
I have no idea how is legally responsible, if indeed anyone is, but I'm guessing they won't be friends any more.
Silver lining and all that.
The one I feel sorry for is the dog.
We imagine when it was admitted the vet was told it was insured – as the amount of surgery and treatments are huge. We have had dogs put to sleep for less.
Her first message to us came the evening the vets send out first reminders for unpaid bills. This may just be a coincidence.
I certainly don’t like the general claim for everything nature, and the fact everyone needs insurance these days incase someone wishes to raise a spurious claim against you. Accidents happen.
Thanks for your advice everyone.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff