Complaint Review: HUNTER JUMPER BARN ROYAL OAK SPORTHORSES AKA Sue Aka Susie Bridgeman-Sutton Thaxton - Poway California
Ripoff Report on CBS 19
Ripoff Report on CBS 19 - Global Marketing Alliance
Ripoff Report on ABC 15 - Smart Shopper
Ripoff Report - Girls Gone Wild
Ripoff Report on Fox 11 - Car Repair
- Author Confirmed
- HUNTER JUMPER BARN ROYAL OAK SPORTHORSES AKA Sue Aka Susie Bridgeman-Sutton Thaxton 14875 Mina De Oro Poway, California U.S.A.
- Phone: 858-675-9518
- Web:
- Category: Animal Services
HUNTER JUMPER BARN ROYAL OAK SPORTHORSES, Sue ,Susie Bridgeman-Sutton Thaxton dutchsporthorse@gmail.com RoyalOak@san.rr.com, San Diego, Poway California
*REBUTTAL Individual responds: Regarding the pony stolen by William & Kerri of Canyon Lake, CA
Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...
listed on other sites?
Those sites steal
Ripoff Report's
content.
We can get those
removed for you!
Find out more here.
Ripoff Report
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
BEWARE OF HUNTER JUMPER BARN ROYAL OAK SPORTHORSES AKA
ROYAL OAK SALES Beware of Sue aka Susie Bridgeman-Sutton Thaxton or her husband BRIDGEMAN SUTTON AIDRIAN.
She goes by many different names to avoid detection. She changes barns. She sells horses in the San Diego Scripps Ranch, Ramona Poway, Lakeside, Del Mar, Rancho Santa Fe area that are not hers. Susie has a fabulous delightful English accent and is a horse trainer & horse trader. I would advise to run in the other direction before having any business dealing with her or her barn. She is dishonest and cannot be trusted. I would take my business elsewhere.
We entered into an agreement take a experienced hunter-jumper horse with show experience on a lease-option [$5K lease/$10K purchase]. We were told the horse had always been sound. It seemed like an amazing horse but came up lame after a few days. When we told Sue we wanted to vet the horse she discouraged us insisting the horse had never been lame and to do other temporary remedial measures like give bute, rest the horse, etc. When the horse did not get better, we eventually got the horse vetted anyway. The horse failed the flex test miserably and x-rays showed TWO long-standing injuries one in the stifle and one the vet believed was OCD in the hock.
Susie refused to refund our money and insisted that once she brought the horse home it was "sound" despite the vet exam and x-rays. While insisting the horse was sound, she said we should just try injections or surgery (on a sound horse?).
Susie continued to refuse to return our money but offered us a green horse who was a paint with 20 days under saddle and had no jumping experience. She then insisted she get $4K-5K for this horse despite the fact this was far above the fair market value for an inexperienced Paint Pony. We demanded that she refund our money and indicated we wished to return the horse.
She insisted that she would not refund our money, as the horse was "sound." She then indicated she would refund our money less $850 for "her expenses" but only after she had the horse for a week to observe and vet the horse. She had previously told us she would take care of our request for a refund on the lame horse after a week of observation and vetting but then refused so we knew if she took the paint back to her barn we would never see a dime.
Finally, one day after repeatedly insisting that she agree to return our money and pick up her pony. She called our boarding facility and indicated the pony was hers and that she was coming with the Sheriff to pick up the pony. She pleaded with the boarding facility not to let us know. Needless to say, this was all made up and she did not show up. Further, my calls to the sheriff's department indicated they would never have gotten involved in a civil matter of this kind. She also called our trainer and equestrian center but to what purpose I have no idea (maybe she thought she was going to embarrass or scare us into simply returning the pony without our money).
We later learned Susie is being pursued by multiple people for selling a Jaguar saddle to multiple people for thousands of dollars then not delivering the saddle. She is being sued by multiple people for selling horses that were alleged not her ponies to sell. She has also purported been evict from 2 barns and the barn(s) has placed liens on all of her horses. I cannot imagine a scammer with a worse pattern for doing business. Stay away at all cost.
By the way my favorite Susie quote [after the $10,000 horse came up lame]: "I tell all my customers you should never expect a horse under $15,000 to vet. You can only get a green horse for under $15,000." When we asked for a refund she simply stated she would repossess the pony. With the green paint pony she has increased its price to $7500. "Wow" If you have already been scammed by Susie please contact the district attorney in San Diego area.
Keri
Canyon Lake, California
U.S.A.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 09/05/2008 08:02 AM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/hunter-jumper-barn-royal-oak-sporthorses-aka-sue-aka-susie-bridgeman-sutton-thaxton/poway-california-92064/hunter-jumper-barn-royal-oak-sporthorses-sue-susie-bridgeman-sutton-thaxton-dutchsportho-370009. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:
#1 REBUTTAL Individual responds
Regarding the pony stolen by William & Kerri of Canyon Lake, CA
AUTHOR: Ros, Llc - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, September 05, 2008
Mr and Mrs S were given a trial period on the lease pony mentioned above to be sure that it would suit their purposes. They were made aware of the pony's requirement for maintenance and that that was reflected in its price. Money changed hands only after they and their trainer approved the pony following the said trial period. We stand by the fact that the first pony was fit for its purpose upon leaving our stables and was returned to us as unsound.
At no point did we represent verbally or in writing that we would refund their down payment on the lease, an arrangement that is in no way provided for in the lease agreement. As a gesture of good will, we offered another pony towards the purchase of which these funds could be applied. We delivered this 5 year old, paint pony mare (which their daughter had used for a lesson on 28th June, 2008) to the Canyon Lake Equestrian Center on 26th July, 2008 to be tried while we waited for a vet's opinion on our pony.
Our vet's opinon was that the pony was fit for the purpose leased (crossrails/short stirrup) but that further maintenance (that is considered routine for many sport horses and ponies) would be a good plan. William (Bill) Sexpressed both verbally when we collected the pony and in writing that such maintenance would not be an issue and that if surgery were required, they loved the pony enough to proceed. Surgery was therefore discussed with my vet (who discouraged it) and that information passed on to the Sunbecks.
During this time, the S------s waffled betweeen wanting to return the paint pony and wanting to extend their trial. We two other, possibly more suitable ponies. Again, only an exchange was offered. Several unacceptable offers were made such as a free lease or a drastically lowered price with them unable to make payment until some future date. If we would not accept their ridiculous offers, they expected a refund against the pony they caused to go lame. Again, no offers of such a refund were ever offered with no provision made for such in the lease agreement signed on 25th June, 2008. Instead, the agreement clearly states that once the trial period is over and payment made, there is no right of refund and the Lesser accepts all responsibility for injury or loss.
They have now had our pony mare since 26th July, 2008, wasting a considerable amount of our time. Calls and emails have frequently been unreturned when need for payment has been brought up. We accepted a reduced offer but with payment required by Friday, 5th September 2008 instead of Thursday, 25th September 2008 or we would have to collect the pony. While a refund of the lease payment made on the first pony is in no way owed or due, we even offered to refund that payment less our costs for delivering and collecting our pony as well as the deposit to hold her. The S------s seem to be of the erroneous opinion that they can dictate the price and terms that we must accept to sell a pony that we own.
We then found that the pony had been removed from the Canyon Lake Equestrian Center, where we had delivered her to the Sunbecks. It was discovered that they were representing themselves as the pony's owner and, knowing money was owed, keeping her locked in a stable (having told the owner of the new facility that someone at the Canyon Lake Equestrian Center claimed the pony as their own).
Attempts to contact the S------s were again ignored and therefore arrangements to collect the pony at 4pm on Thursday, 4th September 2008 were made. The owner of the facility contacted Kerri Sunbeck, who assured the owner that she would contact me immediately. Instead, William and Kerri choose to move the pony in an attempt to conceal it which at this time is being treated as theft with the necessary legal steps being taken.
The rest of their accusations are false. We can be contacted at dutchsporthorse@gmail.com if anyone has any concern, knows the whereabouts of our 5 year old, 14.1hh black and white paint pony mare or wishes further information. I am more than happy to forward the considerable correspondence. We would also like to know who, if anyone, is apparently suing us for selling their pony or feels they bought a pony from us under false pretence.
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.
