If you have purchased on AMHR reg. app

[LaVern]

I forgot to say thank you Lewella for letting us know that the board will be discussing this. It is nice to be kept informed.

 

[chandab]

Irregardless of whether or not these are "challenging economic times", forcing the buyer to pay the seller's membership fee before you can register your horse blows! Coming from (and still being a part of) the "big" horse world, this is one of the most retarded things I have EVER heard as far as horse registries and registration go.

Its not just minis that do it... Policy may have changed since, but I bought an AQHA weanling on Application 6-7 years ago, and in order to register him, I had to pay the breeder's membership, as the breeder was quitting and didn't want to renew.

 

[chandab]

I only have one AMHR registered horse but when I bought her the lady who sold her to me had long ago let her AMHR membership expire. I paid to become a member for one year and transferred her into my name. No hassle at all. So if the rule was there before it was overlooked.
In AMHA it is the new owners responsibility to transfer their new horses. That is the way it should be, that way those that dont really care if the horse is registered in their name dont' have to fork out money for memberships. I'd never go that route, but the 3 horse I've sold so far are still in my name even though they were sold with completed paperwork and pictures to send in!!

Makes me kinda glad most of my horses are AMHA

Sounds like your horse already had AMHR papers, so you just needed a transfer and paid your membership.

This is about foals with registration applications and their breeders not being members, the foal doesn't have its papers yet. So, slightly different circumstances.

 

[Sue_C.]

I don't care how many registries "do it", the fact of the matter is, IMHO, it is just another $$$-grab.

If the stallion report was filed, the sire and dam's paper work up to date, DNA etc...all done...why should it take two memberships to register one foal? If the breeder had registered the foal, it would only have taken the one membership, so why, if the buyer is a member, or willing to become one...what is the difference, except another amount of monies paid to the registry.

I know we members need to "stick together" and support the registries, but to force people to join, or forcing others to pay for others to join as well as themselves...isn't the proper way to go about it. I have never agreed with this rule, and never will.

 

[JMS Miniatures]

I have brought this up before about membership prices and everyone says it supports the registry. This is an example of why paperwork is not getting done. Why we aren't getting new memberships. I still in a way feel that we should be required to be a member to do paperwork, BUT, and thats a BIG but, you look at all the bigger registeries out there, AQHA, APHA, etc..., they only charge like $25 for each membership. BUT you also have to pay extra to receive their magazine.

I propose that AMHR does the same thing. Take whatever how much it is to buy the Journal, (its listed on the site but I'm not looking it up right now), subtract it from the memebership fee and thats what you get. Alot of people will still buy the Journal IMO. That is our only source of news. However new members won't shy away from our membership prices and maybe people will still get paperwork done.

 

[~Lisa~]

Plus, I looked in the rulebook, I looked on the application, I looked on the website- NOWHERE does it state the BREEDER must be a member to register a foal if the person sending in the forms IS a member! ALL it states is that you must be a member to have registry work done.
My letter is in the mail today.

Lucy

This would be something I would question I would want to know from the office exactly where in the rule book this is stated. If it is not clearly and specifically stated then ... well many a long standing rule has been broken but due to it not being specific in black and white the issue was dropped. I would want to see the exact wording of that rule and know when or if it was ever changed?

Sometimes just having someone explain that to you helps the whole thing make sense

 

[Lewella]

I have brought this up before about membership prices and everyone says it supports the registry. This is an example of why paperwork is not getting done. Why we aren't getting new memberships. I still in a way feel that we should be required to be a member to do paperwork, BUT, and thats a BIG but, you look at all the bigger registeries out there, AQHA, APHA, etc..., they only charge like $25 for each membership. BUT you also have to pay extra to receive their magazine.
I propose that AMHR does the same thing. Take whatever how much it is to buy the Journal, (its listed on the site but I'm not looking it up right now), subtract it from the memebership fee and thats what you get. Alot of people will still buy the Journal IMO. That is our only source of news. However new members won't shy away from our membership prices and maybe people will still get paperwork done.

The only problem with this is that technically, The Journal is not a magazine, it is the newsletter of the ASPC/AMHR. It is the only official way for the ASPC/AMHR under current rules to distribute information to the membership. The amount that The Journal is subsidized by the ASPC/AMHR would have to go to publishing a different style of newsletter which would then have to be mailed to the membership. With printing costs, postage, personnel, etc. the cost of a non-advertising supported newsletter could very well exceed the amount that is currently spent by the ASPC/AMHR on The Journal.

 

[minimomNC]

My personal opinion no matter which registery it is, if a horse is eligible for registration papers and the paperwork is all in order and the only thing missing is the breeders membership, then the horse should be registered. After that anything else done with the horse can require that the person requesting the work has to be a member. But a horse deserves the papers even if the owners are unable to pay membership. I also don't think I should have to pay extra because a breeder is "getting out" of the business or doesn't want to keep their membership current.

 

[sedeh]

I think we should be getting mad at the breeders for selling horses on application papers....not the registry! When you own the dam and it foals the breeder is the first "owner" of the foal. Anyone buying the foal has the ownership transfered to them. I think it needs to be broadcasted "buyer beware" when you buy an animal on application. Shame on the breeders for not doing their job and registering these foals.

 

[Sue_C.]

I think we should be getting mad at the breeders for selling horses on application papers....not the registry! When you own the dam and it foals the breeder is the first "owner" of the foal. Anyone buying the foal has the ownership transfered to them. I think it needs to be broadcasted "buyer beware" when you buy an animal on application. Shame on the breeders for not doing their job and registering these foals.

Thing is, whether or not we "get mad" at them, if they really cared, they would be members, and there wouldn't be a problem.

 

[Viki]

This all sure makes me more leery to purchase a foal on application! I'm surprised the C.A.R.E group hasn't waded in on the conversation. Sounds right up their alley, watching out for us all....

Viki

 

[Field-of-Dreams]

I think we should be getting mad at the breeders for selling horses on application papers....not the registry! When you own the dam and it foals the breeder is the first "owner" of the foal. Anyone buying the foal has the ownership transfered to them. I think it needs to be broadcasted "buyer beware" when you buy an animal on application. Shame on the breeders for not doing their job and registering these foals.

I was asked if wanted them to send in the forms or if I wanted to do it. I told them I'd do it, no problem. Normally wasn't a big deal. And I felt it would have been quicker. Right...

Lucy

 

[Mona]

I'm surprised the C.A.R.E group hasn't waded in on the conversation. Sounds right up their alley, watching out for us all....
Viki

CARE no longer exists. Many will be happy to know we have disbanded.

 

[Sue_C.]

CARE no longer exists. Many will be happy to know we have disbanded.

 

[Knighthawke]

It really blows! I had to do this and what made me mad. I bought the horses on DEC 30 of 2008 but I didnt get all the paperwork and PHOTOS they now require done until the first of 2009. I sent it in and even thou I bought them in 2008 and the person was a member in 2008 but I could not sent it in until 2009 I had to pay her membership which she WAS not going to pay herself because the person didnt have any other minis we bought her last 3 minis.

I think it is ridiculous!!

If I would have know I could have sent them all in in 2008 and just not had the paperwork all in order and had them send it back for things that needed done. AND if I thought of it I would have. It would have made it more work on them. But I would have done it to save the membership I had to pay for someone!

 

[LisaB Ozark]

When you send in the paperwork on an unregistered horse - you are actually registering the horse for the original breeder first then a transfer is being done. The horses original breeder is placed on the papers and then the horse is transferred into your name. It is the responsiblity of the breeder to register their foals - not the people that purchase them. You should not be paying that initial registration fee. It is my understanding that as far as the registry is concerned these are two seperate transcations, regardless of who or how the papers are sent in, or where the monies come from. That is why both parties must be members.

I also agree that we should have a non-member fee. Especially for these situations. I dont believe anyone should be forced to join an association but then they should not have the same benefits either.

Lisa - Ozark

 

[ruffian]

'The registeries are not there when your horse is sick, or needs groomed or providing insurance coverage and when you call them they are generally rude and you get an answer of "Sorry, we can't help you until you get the paperwork straightened out yourself."

I've never had anyone in AMHA or AMHR speak rudely to me. They have always been more than helpful.

I think the idea about paying just a membership, not including the magazine, for ONE year for folks who are going out of the miniature business is a good idea. Both magazines used to be separate from the membership anyhow. This would allow those who don't want to continue in the business to spend a little $$$ to get the last of their foals registered.

 

[LaVern]

Oh My, I hope the Journal never changes. Because it is our official newsletter and covers all the business of the AMHR we are able to advertise so reasonably.

 

[kaykay]

I think the idea about paying just a membership, not including the magazine, for ONE year for folks who are going out of the miniature business is a good idea.

Its been pointed out previously that you cannot "do away" with the Journal for a membership. All members have to be notified of any changes, rules etc and the only way we have is the Journal. Its not just a magazine it is the only communciation for members. I can only imagine the lawsuits that could incur if you let someone be a member but then they get no notification of rule changes, registration changes etc. It would be a nightmare.

Im sorry but I just dont think its right to reward "breeders" that dont register their foals, by offering them a lower fee.

I truly do not understand why people are upset with the registry over this. IMO it is not at all the registrys fault.

I have never been treated rudely by office staff and I think they do bend over backwords in most cases to help straighten things out. I know I sold a filly 3 years ago and the new owner never transferred her and then sold her to a new owner and lost the papers. I got a call by the office asking if I could help straighten the mess out for the new owner which I gladly did.

 

[JMS Miniatures]

I think it is sad that we can't do that with the Journal. If you take away the price of the journal our membership fees will be as much as the AQHA, the APHA, etc... You will always have the journal as an option to buy, you will just be paying as much as the old membership fee. I think by doing this you are allowing new members to join and more paperwork being done.

You say its our only source of news, what happened to their website? Why is nobody working on it like they have told us they would? You can have all the news worthy info on there, well except perhaps Nationals and Congress info but thats beside the point.

I just don't understand and still think this is all sad we can't do it. Here comes more breeding of unregistered stock

Also may I say this isn't just AMHR, AMHA is exactly the same way.