TNJ.......... BG's Accounting....... Perspective on a Credit..........

Part One

One of the next things that really jumped up and smacked me on BG's accounting was the credit he gave me for Totally Klear. Now you must be wondering why would I complain about a credit? Once again I will say the devil is in the details.

Totally Klear was that yearling BG had in for training to show halter. If you remember I had agreed to do the training, as a favor to him, while BG did the conditioning on that horse. This was the horse he couldn't take in for training unless I helped him because he didn't know how to train the horse to stand up to show got halter classes. Considering that BG was paid $300 for conditioning and training the horse, when he gave half of it to me for the training in the form of that credit that left the other half of the amount paid, which was also $150, to be what he was paid for doing the conditioning part. I figured that meant he was saying the conditioning part would be worth $150. Does that make sense to you?

When Rhet, Scarlet and Gypcy had turned up on BG's list of horses he worked in that email of his, I had reminded him in my responding email http://risingrainbow.blogspot.com/2011/02/new-journeymy-response.html that I had done the training on the horse, TK. I said BG shouldn't be charging me for Rhet, Scarlet or Gypcy. The man only worked one of them at the exact time I did his training on TK for him. Occasionally he worked one of them and there were times the young woman who worked for BG lunged these horses for me. During these times that my horses were being lunged by BG or his assistant I was engaged in doing something else that was his to do. I was prepared with witness testimony to substantiate that most times I was the one who lunged those horses and that when I wasn't lunging I was doing other groom type duties or the training of the horse, TK.

It's important to note there was an exception to me usually being the one to lunge those horses but it was right at the beginning in January because BG thought only he could teach them how to lunge. That exception only lasted long enough for me to get him pushed aside and doing the work myself which believe me did not take long.

I did not want him lunging my horses. The purpose of our contract was to get my young horses started under saddle. I had no intention of taking up that money paying him for something I intended to do myself. However when he did lunge them in the beginning, I got the next horse ready for him while he was in the round pen and put the previously worked horse away, whatever that entailed like cooling out etc, so it still was a trade off as far as I am concerned. I was doing his work, he was doing mine. Other than that I worked those horses on my own with few exceptions. Many, many days BG never touched any of these three horses unless, of course, that was to pet one as he walked through the barn aisle.

I think BG figured he could get away with charging me for Rhet, Scarlet and Gypcy if he gave me that credit for TK. The only problem was he charged me $300 a month for each horse for something his own figures stated was worth $150. I was pretty sure the court and a jury would be able to see the inequities in that as well as get a clearer picture of the lengths to which BG would go to pad his numbers. This behavior also fit the criteria for Unfair Business Practices as well as violating the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Practices.

I really didn't think then nor do I think now there should be any charge for the horses that were lunged. Giving the man any credit at all for doing work with these three horses is a stretch from what he actually deserves based on work done. I did, however, include those horses in the totals I reconstructed because I didn't know how to determine how much of the work BG actually did so for the sake of argument, I added them into my totals. However, I adjusted those totals allowing for the $150 that BG used for lunging in his accounting for TK instead of the $300 training charge he applied in his records against me because his double standard is grossly inappropriate.

In those totals I did not allow any credit for myself for the training of TK because I had told BG I would do it for him as a favor. He had offered to pay me but I had declined because it is against the rules of USEF for me to get paid for training and still show as an amateur. The fact that BG was now charging me for things he had originally told me were "friends helping friends" didn't mean I would stoop to his level and do the same thing, nor would I ever accept anything for training that was against USEF rules .

I will admit that BG thought he needed to have a small round pen up to teach these horses how to lunge. He carried that thing panel by panel into the arena or had one of his kids do it. He'd construct it in the morning for the lunges and then took it down again once the lunges were done. I don't remember how long specifically that went on but before long the round pen was left up at the near end of the arena and that unnecessary work of moving the round pen in and out was stopped.

While BG might contend all that work of assembling the round pen entitled him to training fees for each horse, those horses didn't need that round pen to learn how to lunge, nor did they need BG for that purpose. I was perfectly capable of doing it myself as I clearly informed BG on more than one occasion. I have taught plenty of horses how to lunge AND done so without the use of a round pen.

To be sure the court could grasp the difference between lunging and training horses, I printed out the USEF rule describing what constitutes an amateur. It clearly states in that rule working as a groom is acceptable for an amateur to do without messing up their status. Then I located websites with articles about groom duties that included specifically lunging within the exercise duties of a groom and printed those off too. Both items were to be included as exhibits for my case.

While I understand that teaching a horse to lunge is within the terms of what most horse people would consider training, it is not within the level of work determined by either USEF or many training barns to be something a trainer mush teach. I suspect that teaching horses to lunge has been within the realm of groom duties for hundreds of years and I wanted to court to clearly understand that aspect of my dispute over BG charging me training fees for lunging my horses.

There's my explanation on why I thought that credit on BG's accounting sheet jumped out at me. The man had used that $150 credit to justify charging $900 a month for working three horses, and $600 for the months that two were worked. That manipulation was pretty bad. Over the course of his accounting sheet I figure those charges came to a total of around $6300 when in actuality, the man really deserved very little considering I was working those horses most of the time and doing his other work on those occasions he did work them.

On my accounting I'm guesstimating he received somewhere around $900 which was more than generous considering the amount of time the horses were actually at his facility to work, the adjustment in the rate charged, and that little issue of work actually done by him. That total includes NO adjustment for me working my horses at all. It is based solely on the $150 rate per horse and the true number of days each horse was lunged at his facility.

Personally I think BG's manipulation of those fees says a lot about his character and that of WF. While she may not have been the one writing in the numbers or doing the math, she was clearly at his side reinforcing he could charge full training for any horse, no matter what the man did with it. Her FB comment clearly leaves her out there on that limb. I was wondering what it would take to get her to cut that sucker off.

To be continued.........................

Let's Talk about Dandy........

This is one of my favorite pictures of the twins. There is something about these sweet faces tucked under their mom this way that pulls at my heart. I wish Surprise wasn't wearing that neck bandage but it is an important part of their story so I guess it's meant to be there. I can't help but remember what an awesome mom, Vee was to these two little hellions but then she was a hellion herself when she was a foal. Picks of that will follow. Hope you're enjoying revisiting these pics of my foals. I'm not sure if posting them makes me more sad or less sad I have no foal arriving this year but it sure does help me appreciate the foals I've had. Sweet babies, all of them.


Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY