Steer clear of horses.

[c c]

The British Horse Society said:

The UK’s largest horse charity The British Horse Society yesterday (Tuesday, June 27) backed a ruling by Appeal Court judges.
The BHS praised Britain’s top judge, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips, who was sitting with Lord Justice Buxton and Lord Justice Sedley, at the Appeal Court in London.
The judges quashed a Newcastle County Court ruling that a rider involved in an accident with a motorist was responsible for the actions of that horse as a matter of strict liability – with no legal defence against damage caused by that horse.
The BHS’s Safety Senior Executive Sheila Hardy said: “This is a landmark victory for all riders, particularly those who have no option but to ride on the road. Careful and responsible riders should not live in fear of being sued after events arising from circumstances beyond their control.
“The BHS applauds the Appeal Court judges' ruling for its wisdom and sense. There should be room for all on the roads provided that mutual courtesy and consideration is given.”

The full Court Report: www.lostbridleways.co.uk/library/court.doc

[tigger1]

Good - although I'm not fussed at all about horses, I do class them in the same group as cyclists, "at risk, and likely to take unpredictable actions in the road"...therefore I try to give both a wide berth.

Does f*ck me off something rotten when I'm cycling that people try to squeeze by me rather than use the other lane (and no, I don't ride in the gutter!)

[rich 36]

Now get these stupid little bastards gone,

who pass horse and riders as if they're not there and whine about,

'well horses don't pay tax or insurance"

so i'm alright to drive like a through the villages,
and lanes, not paying the slightest attention to anything beyond the drum & bass

Edited by rich 36 on Thursday 6th July 23:09

[c c]

tigger1 said:

Good - although I'm not fussed at all about horses,

You might be if one knocked you off your bike. The rider could say the horse did not go in the direction they had expected and any claim for damages sustained to you or your bike would, according to this ruling be null and void.

[TIPPER]

Totally agree. Too little consideration for others these days. I like to press on in my Elise and I ain't no saint but do try to show due consideration for other road users.
It has always worried me that one of Tiff Needells favorite roads is slap bang in the middle of Devon horsey country.

[greenpeace]

isnt it the old addage, "steam gives way to sail"?, horses were there before cars and all that

[deeps]

Surely if we're all sharing the same tarmac there will always be a risk of accidents. I have insurance for that purpose.

Are horse riders exempt from compulsory insurance? If so, what a crazy unjust and expensive situation you will find yourself in, should you be damaged by one.

This ruling stinks!

[c c]

greenpeace said:

isnt it the old addage, "steam gives way to sail"?, horses were there before cars and all that

The rider should still be responsible for the horse though.

[deeps]

According to the judges' logic, it would be very uncharacteristic of me to have a heart attack and swerve into another road user, but should that happen I would be absolved of all blame and liability!
What a nonsense!

[V8 Archie]

greenpeace said:

isnt it the old addage, "steam gives way to sail"?, horses were there before cars and all that

Slow down for, give a wide berth to, fine. But if some rider can't stop their mount from jumping on me I want reparation.

Sail boats can't randomly jump onto steam boats and if they did the damage would be pretty minimal.

[7db]

Be nice if they were wearing all hi-vis - too many I find are not. However, I find most horse riders courteous and thankful for one passing quietly, slowly and with a wide berth.

[greenpeace]

makes me think of Fred Dibnah and his British Tour on his steam roller lol

[Fat Richie]

deeps said:

Surely if we're all sharing the same tarmac there will always be a risk of accidents. I have insurance for that purpose.

Are horse riders exempt from compulsory insurance? If so, what a crazy unjust and expensive situation you will find yourself in, should you be damaged by one.

This ruling stinks!

If horse riders have to have insurance then should the same not apply to cyclists? Just think of all that extra insurance tax Robber Brown could collect!

[WildCat]

Very sad story in a Northern local newspaper. Lady horserider - 23 year old Mama of two died when she was trapped under a car. She turn into road way from a bridle path. Horse apparently saw car in corner of eye und just spooked und threw the rider over his head und into path of car - und she trapped under the wheels. Horse was slightly injured. 22 year old driving this car was traumatised.

Sometimes .. purely fatal bad luck ...for all.

[WildCat]

c c said:

greenpeace said:

isnt it the old addage, "steam gives way to sail"?, horses were there before cars and all that

The rider should still be responsible for the horse though.

There ist a horse riders' proficiency test - simialr to cycling proficiency - but like the cycling test - not compulsory und it should be

Memebers of the family do ride horses.. my sister ist rather cool when she does this side saddle und American riding stuff.

But like a good driver knows the car - a good rider should know his or her mount - know their temperament as you are up on the rein und controlling this horse by rein und knee work.

Und if on the road und horse ist a bit prone to spook - then horse rider really need to be careful. But having said that - horse ist easier to control und soothe if rider in saddle. If rider ist walking the horse - horse could bolt.

[Le TVR]

WildCat said:

But having said that - horse ist easier to control und soothe if rider in saddle..

Every horse I know is the opposite. If you lead them they are much less likely to spook as they are just 'following'.

Sounds like the UK needs an equivalent of the the French civil liability insurance. When I ride I am insured for the action of my horse via my riding federation licence, and if I didnt have that then it would be covered by the civil liability clause of my household insurance.

[tigger1]

c c said:

tigger1 said:

Good - although I'm not fussed at all about horses,

You might be if one knocked you off your bike. The rider could say the horse did not go in the direction they had expected and any claim for damages sustained to you or your bike would, according to this ruling be null and void.

I hope you've not taken what I said the wrong way - I'm just not a fan of horses, I do give them a very wide berth, far more than a bike usually (although I give those plenty) on the grounds that horses move backwards and sideways too, bikes tend not to.

[supermono]

Hmmm. So now we can expect people to take horses on the road that aren't properly trained and which might suddenly and without warning jump around and kick my car whilst it's passing at a safe distance (safe assuming the horse doesn't go bezerk), and then leave me to foot the bill.

A bit like someone taking to the road in a car without brakes or proper steering. When they crash into me they too can claim they weren't responsible for the unpredictable actions of their steed.

Or am I missing something?

SM

[AJLintern]

I don't think I'd trust a horse with my life by riding on the road. When my aunt was a teenager she was very lucky to survive when her horse decided to cross the road into the path of a removals van She was in a coma for a few days apparently.

[AndyAudi]

If a farmers horse decides to break out of a field into the path of a car, whilst no-one is with it. My money says the Farmer would be liable as the horse was his responsibility. (the difference perhaps being the farmer carries insurance)

I do show respect to horses and accept their right to use the road however, if it is recognised that these things can perhaps become uncontrollable & unpredictable, then they should carry some sort of insurance surely.