Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v NW Tiley 10 August 2013 – Decision dated 16 August 2013
ID: JCA13780
Decision:
NON RACEDAY INQUIRY
RIU v NW Tiley
Decision:
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY
UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003
HELD AT PUKEKOHE RACECOURSE
IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Racing
BETWEEN RACING INTEGRITY UNIT
Informant
AND MR NW TILEY – Licensed Class A TRAINER
Defendant
JUDICIAL COMMITTEE: Mr A Dooley (Chairman), Mr B Scott (Committee Member)
Charge:
The Informant, Mr R Carmichael, Chief Racing Investigator, alleged that on the 9th day of July 2013 Mr NW Tiley was the Trainer and person responsible for the nomination and presentation of the unnamed 2yr old gelding NO EXCUSE NEEDED – SARAH LITTLE to compete in Heat 3 at the trials meeting conducted by the Cambridge Jockey Club at Cambridge. When, upon inspection, it was found to be the incorrect gelding; being in breach of Clause 4 (a) of the Third Appendix (Regulations For Trials) and Rule 404 (2) of the Rules of Racing, and that Mr NW Tiley is therefore liable to the penalty or penalties that may be imposed pursuant to Rule 803 (1) of the said Rules.
Rule 404(2) provides: A person shall not enter, accept, start or intend to start a horse in a Race or trial (including a jump-out or test for certification purposes) under a name other than its registered name or its recorded breeding details in the case of an unnamed horse that is entered for or starts in a trial.
Mr Tiley acknowledged he had received a copy of the relevant documents. He told the Committee that he understood them and admitted the breach. Mr Tiley accepted that the summary of facts presented was a correct account of the incident.
Evidence for the Informant:
The facts presented by Mr Oatham on behalf of Mr R Carmichael, Chief Racing Investigator, are not in dispute and are summarised as follows:
All matters preliminary to this hearing have been properly attended to, including:
An authority to lodge the Information
The serving and filing of the Information
The appointment of this Judicial Committee
Mr Tiley is an experienced Class A Licensed Trainer.
On 9 July 2013 he was the person responsible for the nomination and presentation of an unnamed 2 yr old gelding, purported to be by No Excuse Needed out of Sarah Little, to compete in Heat 3 at a Trials Meeting conducted by the Cambridge Jockey Club at Cambridge. A copy of the entry in the Trials program is produced.
Prior to attending the Trials, the Stewards obtained the identification sheets from NZTR. The identification/brand sheet for Heat 3 is produced.
The No Excuse Needed – Sarah Little gelding is recorded with the brands WS and 15 over 0.
Upon inspection by the Stewards prior to racing it was found that the gelding which was presented by Mr Tiley was branded WS and 143 over 0.
From the brands and microchip, the Stewards established that the horse presented at the Trials was in fact the unnamed No Excuse Needed – Kathy O’Reilly 2 yr old gelding. The Brand and DNA Type Identification Certificates for both horses are produced.
The horse that was presented was photographed by the Stewards.
As a consequence, the horse was scratched from the trial, with the entry fee being forfeited.
Subsequent enquiries confirm that both horses were purchased by Mr Tiley as weanlings at the May 2011 sales.
Mr Tiley has submitted a statement in which he outlines the chronology of events subsequent to the purchase and possession of both horses. From the outset it is obvious that he has made a genuine mistake with the identity of the horses.
Two weeks prior to the trials meeting Mr Tiley submitted Stable Returns for both horses. These are produced as exhibits. The Judicial Committee will note that the details on each form confirm Mr Tiley’s belief in the identification of each horse. Notwithstanding the incorrect brands being notified on the Stable Returns, the errors were not detected when processed at NZTR some days prior to the horse being nominated for the trials of 9 July 2013.
Evidence for the Defendant:
Mr Tiley informed the Committee that on 1st May he and his wife went to the New Zealand Bloodstock (NZB) sales Complex to inspect lot 17 in the weanling section of the sale. It was the only lot that he inspected because he liked the breeding NO EXCUSE NEEDED x SARAH LITTLE. They were shown a light bay colt with a lump on the right hand side of his face which was consistent with being kicked or something similar as a foal.
Mr Tiley was working as a bid spotter with NZB, when Lot 17 entered the ring to be sold. There was an opening bid of $500 and no more bids came so he put in his own bid for $750 and the colt was knocked down to him. He had always intended to purchase another weanling as a mate if he was able to purchase Lot 17. Towards the end of the day Lot 262 came through the ring and there was no opening bid on him so he purchased him for $500 with his own bid. The 2 weanlings were consigned to Ms Archer at Archer Park. She asked Mr Tiley if he would like Dr Gilmour to inspect the lump on the side of one of the weanling's face. He presumed that this would be Lot 17 that he thought he had been shown the previous day. When Ms Archer delivered the weanlings home to his property approximately four days later the hip stickers with the Lot numbers had been removed. He inspected them and one of the colts was the light bay colt that he had inspected at the Sales Complex with the lump on his face. From that day on they were of the assumption that he was the NO EXCUSE NEEDED x SARAH LITTLE and the larger dark bay colt was Lot 262 NO EXCUSE NEEDED x KATHY O'REILLY.
On the 11th November 2011 the larger darker bay colt put his leg through a fence and he had Ms Pemberton from Auckland Vets come to stitch him up and follow up treatment was required. He provided copies of the invoices to the Committee. The attached photograph of this injury made it clear that there are no white markings on this horse's legs.
Both horses were sent at the same time to Ms Leghorn at Waiuku to be broken in and any invoicing was charged to each horse as he believed them to be.
They both came at various times to his own stables for education with any invoicing also charged as he thought them to be. He also completed Stable Returns and change of ownership with the brands filled in by Mr Tiley. These were obviously wrong.
Mr Tiley entered the NO EXCUSE NEEDED x SARAH LITTLE for the Cambridge Trials on 9 July 2013 and presented him in the birdcage to trial in heat 3 over 800 m. The horse was inspected by Mr Oatham and Mr Tiley was told that it could not trial because its brands and Microchip did not match NZTR records. Mr Tiley was adamant that it was the right horse but Mr Oatham informed him that after a phone call to NZTR the horse was in fact NO EXCUSE NEEDED x KATHY O'REILLY. Mr Oatham would not let the horse trial which Mr Tiley accepted and Mr Oatham told him to contact NZTR and ask how he could clear this matter up.
Mr Tiley immediately contacted NZTR and they advised him to ask a Vet to come and ID the two horses and also take DNA samples. He arranged for Dr Bridge to come straight over and do this for him. He also rang Mr Seabrook at NZB to arrange video footage of both horses going through the sale ring to be emailed to him. It was not until he viewed this footage that he realised that he had both horses' identity mixed up from the day they arrived into his care.
Mr Tiley did accept full responsibility for this mistake and would like to assure us that he entered the gelding genuinely believing it was the correct horse. He added it had been a costly exercise taking into account the float fee to Cambridge and forfeiting the trial fee as well.
Decision:
As Mr Tiley admitted the breach we find the charge proved.
Submissions for the penalty by the Informant:
Mr Oatham submitted that the Judicial Control Authority Penalty Guide for a breach of Rule 404(2) is a fine, with a starting point of $800. He said this is of course a matter for the Judicial Committee, taking into account aggravating or mitigating circumstances of this particular case.
He said in this case the Committee is entitled to draw a distinction between trials meeting (where horses may be unnamed and attend trials for education) and an actual race meeting.
He said Mr Tiley has no previous record involving matters such as this. He added Mr Tiley has been totally co-operative throughout this investigation.
Mr Oatham finally highlighted the point that part of the licensing process is for Trainers to complete physical checks on their horses against NZTR records to ensure compliance. He stated he was surprised that the error Mr Tiley made when submitting his stable returns was not identified at NZTR. He was of the view that it should have been flagged at the stage when Mr Tiley had recorded the wrong horse.
Submissions for the Defendant:
Mr Tiley submitted that he takes full responsibility for presenting the wrong horse at a trial meeting. However, he stated he was also surprised that NZTR had not picked up the error when he sent in his Stable Return 2 weeks prior to the trial.
Reasons for Penalty:
The Committee carefully considered all the evidence and submissions presented. The mitigating factors are Mr Tiley's ready admission of the breach, his clear record under this Rule, his genuine remorse which was evident during the hearing and his cooperation with Stewards. We are totally satisfied there was no intent or malice on Mr Tiley's part to deceive officials by presenting the wrong horse to an official trial meeting. Mr Tiley acknowledged that as a prominent trainer in NZ it was fortunate the error was indentified at the Trials. He noted that horses are exported on the back of Trial performances. The Committee referred to the JCA penalty guide which showed a starting point of $800 fine. We also referred to the JCA database which showed recent penalties under this Rule, they all resulted in a $500 fine, with the Trainers having similar mitigating factors.
The Committee finds it unfortunate this error was not picked up at the time the stable returns and change of ownership were submitted.
Therefore taking into account the numerous mitigating factors we consider an appropriate penalty to be a $450 fine.
Penalty:
On the question of costs, the RIU and JCA sought no costs as this hearing was held prior to a race meeting.
Accordingly, we impose a fine of $450 on Mr Tiley.
Appeal Decision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
Decision Date: 19/08/2013
Publish Date: 19/08/2013
JCA Decision Fields (raw)
Dmitry: This section contains all JCA fields migrated from the raw data.
Data from these fields should be mapped appropriately to display amongst the standard fields above; please make note of any values below that are missing in the above standard fields but should be there.
hearingid: 63bea7e31c736cec8a6d2ca8c97560db
informantnumber: A2854
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 19/08/2013
hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v NW Tiley 10 August 2013 - Decision dated 16 August 2013
charge:
facts:
appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
NON RACEDAY INQUIRY
RIU v NW Tiley
Decision:
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY
UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003
HELD AT PUKEKOHE RACECOURSE
IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Racing
BETWEEN RACING INTEGRITY UNIT
Informant
AND MR NW TILEY – Licensed Class A TRAINER
Defendant
JUDICIAL COMMITTEE: Mr A Dooley (Chairman), Mr B Scott (Committee Member)
Charge:
The Informant, Mr R Carmichael, Chief Racing Investigator, alleged that on the 9th day of July 2013 Mr NW Tiley was the Trainer and person responsible for the nomination and presentation of the unnamed 2yr old gelding NO EXCUSE NEEDED – SARAH LITTLE to compete in Heat 3 at the trials meeting conducted by the Cambridge Jockey Club at Cambridge. When, upon inspection, it was found to be the incorrect gelding; being in breach of Clause 4 (a) of the Third Appendix (Regulations For Trials) and Rule 404 (2) of the Rules of Racing, and that Mr NW Tiley is therefore liable to the penalty or penalties that may be imposed pursuant to Rule 803 (1) of the said Rules.
Rule 404(2) provides: A person shall not enter, accept, start or intend to start a horse in a Race or trial (including a jump-out or test for certification purposes) under a name other than its registered name or its recorded breeding details in the case of an unnamed horse that is entered for or starts in a trial.
Mr Tiley acknowledged he had received a copy of the relevant documents. He told the Committee that he understood them and admitted the breach. Mr Tiley accepted that the summary of facts presented was a correct account of the incident.
Evidence for the Informant:
The facts presented by Mr Oatham on behalf of Mr R Carmichael, Chief Racing Investigator, are not in dispute and are summarised as follows:
All matters preliminary to this hearing have been properly attended to, including:
An authority to lodge the Information
The serving and filing of the Information
The appointment of this Judicial Committee
Mr Tiley is an experienced Class A Licensed Trainer.
On 9 July 2013 he was the person responsible for the nomination and presentation of an unnamed 2 yr old gelding, purported to be by No Excuse Needed out of Sarah Little, to compete in Heat 3 at a Trials Meeting conducted by the Cambridge Jockey Club at Cambridge. A copy of the entry in the Trials program is produced.
Prior to attending the Trials, the Stewards obtained the identification sheets from NZTR. The identification/brand sheet for Heat 3 is produced.
The No Excuse Needed – Sarah Little gelding is recorded with the brands WS and 15 over 0.
Upon inspection by the Stewards prior to racing it was found that the gelding which was presented by Mr Tiley was branded WS and 143 over 0.
From the brands and microchip, the Stewards established that the horse presented at the Trials was in fact the unnamed No Excuse Needed – Kathy O’Reilly 2 yr old gelding. The Brand and DNA Type Identification Certificates for both horses are produced.
The horse that was presented was photographed by the Stewards.
As a consequence, the horse was scratched from the trial, with the entry fee being forfeited.
Subsequent enquiries confirm that both horses were purchased by Mr Tiley as weanlings at the May 2011 sales.
Mr Tiley has submitted a statement in which he outlines the chronology of events subsequent to the purchase and possession of both horses. From the outset it is obvious that he has made a genuine mistake with the identity of the horses.
Two weeks prior to the trials meeting Mr Tiley submitted Stable Returns for both horses. These are produced as exhibits. The Judicial Committee will note that the details on each form confirm Mr Tiley’s belief in the identification of each horse. Notwithstanding the incorrect brands being notified on the Stable Returns, the errors were not detected when processed at NZTR some days prior to the horse being nominated for the trials of 9 July 2013.
Evidence for the Defendant:
Mr Tiley informed the Committee that on 1st May he and his wife went to the New Zealand Bloodstock (NZB) sales Complex to inspect lot 17 in the weanling section of the sale. It was the only lot that he inspected because he liked the breeding NO EXCUSE NEEDED x SARAH LITTLE. They were shown a light bay colt with a lump on the right hand side of his face which was consistent with being kicked or something similar as a foal.
Mr Tiley was working as a bid spotter with NZB, when Lot 17 entered the ring to be sold. There was an opening bid of $500 and no more bids came so he put in his own bid for $750 and the colt was knocked down to him. He had always intended to purchase another weanling as a mate if he was able to purchase Lot 17. Towards the end of the day Lot 262 came through the ring and there was no opening bid on him so he purchased him for $500 with his own bid. The 2 weanlings were consigned to Ms Archer at Archer Park. She asked Mr Tiley if he would like Dr Gilmour to inspect the lump on the side of one of the weanling's face. He presumed that this would be Lot 17 that he thought he had been shown the previous day. When Ms Archer delivered the weanlings home to his property approximately four days later the hip stickers with the Lot numbers had been removed. He inspected them and one of the colts was the light bay colt that he had inspected at the Sales Complex with the lump on his face. From that day on they were of the assumption that he was the NO EXCUSE NEEDED x SARAH LITTLE and the larger dark bay colt was Lot 262 NO EXCUSE NEEDED x KATHY O'REILLY.
On the 11th November 2011 the larger darker bay colt put his leg through a fence and he had Ms Pemberton from Auckland Vets come to stitch him up and follow up treatment was required. He provided copies of the invoices to the Committee. The attached photograph of this injury made it clear that there are no white markings on this horse's legs.
Both horses were sent at the same time to Ms Leghorn at Waiuku to be broken in and any invoicing was charged to each horse as he believed them to be.
They both came at various times to his own stables for education with any invoicing also charged as he thought them to be. He also completed Stable Returns and change of ownership with the brands filled in by Mr Tiley. These were obviously wrong.
Mr Tiley entered the NO EXCUSE NEEDED x SARAH LITTLE for the Cambridge Trials on 9 July 2013 and presented him in the birdcage to trial in heat 3 over 800 m. The horse was inspected by Mr Oatham and Mr Tiley was told that it could not trial because its brands and Microchip did not match NZTR records. Mr Tiley was adamant that it was the right horse but Mr Oatham informed him that after a phone call to NZTR the horse was in fact NO EXCUSE NEEDED x KATHY O'REILLY. Mr Oatham would not let the horse trial which Mr Tiley accepted and Mr Oatham told him to contact NZTR and ask how he could clear this matter up.
Mr Tiley immediately contacted NZTR and they advised him to ask a Vet to come and ID the two horses and also take DNA samples. He arranged for Dr Bridge to come straight over and do this for him. He also rang Mr Seabrook at NZB to arrange video footage of both horses going through the sale ring to be emailed to him. It was not until he viewed this footage that he realised that he had both horses' identity mixed up from the day they arrived into his care.
Mr Tiley did accept full responsibility for this mistake and would like to assure us that he entered the gelding genuinely believing it was the correct horse. He added it had been a costly exercise taking into account the float fee to Cambridge and forfeiting the trial fee as well.
Decision:
As Mr Tiley admitted the breach we find the charge proved.
Submissions for the penalty by the Informant:
Mr Oatham submitted that the Judicial Control Authority Penalty Guide for a breach of Rule 404(2) is a fine, with a starting point of $800. He said this is of course a matter for the Judicial Committee, taking into account aggravating or mitigating circumstances of this particular case.
He said in this case the Committee is entitled to draw a distinction between trials meeting (where horses may be unnamed and attend trials for education) and an actual race meeting.
He said Mr Tiley has no previous record involving matters such as this. He added Mr Tiley has been totally co-operative throughout this investigation.
Mr Oatham finally highlighted the point that part of the licensing process is for Trainers to complete physical checks on their horses against NZTR records to ensure compliance. He stated he was surprised that the error Mr Tiley made when submitting his stable returns was not identified at NZTR. He was of the view that it should have been flagged at the stage when Mr Tiley had recorded the wrong horse.
Submissions for the Defendant:
Mr Tiley submitted that he takes full responsibility for presenting the wrong horse at a trial meeting. However, he stated he was also surprised that NZTR had not picked up the error when he sent in his Stable Return 2 weeks prior to the trial.
Reasons for Penalty:
The Committee carefully considered all the evidence and submissions presented. The mitigating factors are Mr Tiley's ready admission of the breach, his clear record under this Rule, his genuine remorse which was evident during the hearing and his cooperation with Stewards. We are totally satisfied there was no intent or malice on Mr Tiley's part to deceive officials by presenting the wrong horse to an official trial meeting. Mr Tiley acknowledged that as a prominent trainer in NZ it was fortunate the error was indentified at the Trials. He noted that horses are exported on the back of Trial performances. The Committee referred to the JCA penalty guide which showed a starting point of $800 fine. We also referred to the JCA database which showed recent penalties under this Rule, they all resulted in a $500 fine, with the Trainers having similar mitigating factors.
The Committee finds it unfortunate this error was not picked up at the time the stable returns and change of ownership were submitted.
Therefore taking into account the numerous mitigating factors we consider an appropriate penalty to be a $450 fine.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
On the question of costs, the RIU and JCA sought no costs as this hearing was held prior to a race meeting.
Accordingly, we impose a fine of $450 on Mr Tiley.
hearing_type: Non-race day
Rules: 404(2)
Informant: Mr TR Carmichael - Chief Racing Investigator
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr J Oatham - Senior Stipendiary Steward acting on behalf of Mr TR Carmichael
Respondent: Mr NW Tiley - Licensed Class A Trainer
StipendSteward:
raceid:
race_expapproval:
racecancelled:
race_noreport:
race_emailed1:
race_emailed2:
race_title:
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid:
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport:
waitingforpublication:
meet_emailed1:
meet_emailed2:
meetdate: no date provided
meet_title:
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation:
meet_racingtype:
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: