Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v L J Bond – Decision dated 20 November 2016 – Chair, Mr N Skelt
ID: JCA16314
Decision:
BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF
THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY
UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003
AND IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing
BETWEEN RACING INTEGRITY UNIT (RIU)
Informant
AND LYNDON JAMES BOND, Graduation Horseman
Respondent
Information No: A6638
Judicial Committee: Mr N.D Skelt, Chairman - Mr V.G Munro, Committee Member
Appearing: Mr C Allison, for the Informant
The Respondent.
Date of hearing: 20 November 2016.
DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
1. The respondent Mr Lyndon James Bond is currently licensed as a Graduation Horseman and he has a Public Trainer’s Licence.
2. On the 1st of October 2016 at Mataura, Lyndon James Bond being the holder of a Graduation Horseman’s licence, did bet on a horse namely EXPLOSIVE STAR in a race, namely Race 1, The Tony Stratford Racing Stables/Willy’s Flooring Handicap Trot at the Northern Southland Trotting Club race meeting held at Ascot Park Raceway Invercargill in which race he drove the horse EXPLOSIVE STAR having placed 2 final field place bets, for $100 each @ $3.10 on EXPLOSIVE STAR in breach of Rule 505(1) and (2) which is declared to be a serious racing offence and you are therefore liable to the penalties which may be imposed in accordance with Rule 1001 (2)(a)(b) and (c) of the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing.
3. The relevant rules are:
505(1) A horseman may not bet on any horse or combination of horses in a race, in which he or she is driving;
(2) A breach of this sub-rule (1) is declared to be a serious racing offence;
1001(2) Every person who commits a serious racing offence shall be liable to the following penalties:
(a) a fine not exceeding $30,000; and/or
(b) suspension from holding or obtaining a licence, for any specific period or for life; and/or
(c) disqualification for a specific period or for life.
(3) The Judicial Committee may in addition to or substitution of any penalty imposed under sub-rule (2) hereof disqualify from any race and/or for any specific period or for life any horse connected with the serious racing offence.
4. Mr Allison produced written authority from the General Manager RIU, Mr. Mike Godber, in a letter dated 4th November 2016, to file an information alleging a breach of Rule 505(1).
5. Mr Bond confirmed to the committee that he admitted the breach of Rule 505(1).
The Facts:
6. Mr. Bond has driven in a total of 285 races (as at 3rd November 2016) for 6 wins, 5 seconds and 14 third placings.
7. Mr. Bond had correctly entered EXPLOSIVE START in Race 1 the Tony Stratford Racing Stables/Big Willy’s Flooring Handicap Trot at the Northern Southland Trotting Club meeting held on Saturday the 1st of October 2016 at Ascot Park Raceway.
8. EXPLOSIVE STAR is a 6 year old gelding which is trained and was driven by Mr. Bond to win the race by a length and three quarters. EXPLOSIVE STAR was 6/6 in the betting and paid $13.80 to win and $3.60 for a place. EXPLOSIVE STAR won $3,575 winning stake money.
9. EXPLOSIVE STAR has had a total of 38 starts for 2 wins 4 seconds and 1 third for total stake money of $15,518 as at the 3rd of November 2016.
10. EXPLOSIVE STAR was recently leased to race by Mr. Bonds father Mr. Jimmy Bond on the 14th of September 2016.
11. The Racing Integrity Unit Betting Analyst was requested to make enquiries in relation to Mr. Bond’s TAB account by Racing Investigators following this race.
12. The enquiries confirmed Mr. Bond had made the bets as listed below.
13. At 9.03am on Saturday the 1st of October Mr. Lyndon Bond has placed a $100 bet on fixed odds place betting on EXPLOSIVE STAR at $3.10 to win $310 via the internet on his own TAB account.
14. At 9.04am Mr. Bond has placed another bet on EXPLOSIVE STAR of $100 on fixed odds place betting again at odds of $3.10 to win $310 via the internet on his TAB account.
15. As a result of those bets Mr. Bond received $620 for an outlay of $200 with a $420 profit.
16. When questioned regarding the betting Mr. Bond initially denied making the bets and alleged it was his wife who had placed them on using his TAB account.
17. He later admitted making the bets after further evidence was obtained and put to him.
18. Mr. Bond admitted he had placed the 2 bets on the morning of the races on his wife’s cell phone. He had intended to put $100 to win and $100 for a place on EXPLOSIVE STAR on fixed odds but he had made a mistake during the transaction and instead placed the 2 place bets for $100 each.
19. Mr. Bond claimed he was not fully aware of the betting rules and thought he may have been allowed to place bets on his own horse.
20. Mr. Bond stated he wasn’t great at keeping up with relevant rule changes as he only drives occasionally.
21. In explanation for making the bets Mr. Bond believed the rule was unfair because the connections of horses should be able to make some money from a bet due to the knowledge they had of the horses lead up training.
22. The rule in relation to horsemen betting on races they drive in was introduced in April 2014 where they are unable to bet on any race they drive in. The previous driving rule allowed drivers to bet on their own horse they were driving.
23. There were no concerns regarding the manner Mr. Bond drove EXPLOSIVE STAR which won the race convincingly.
24. Mr. Bond does not have any breaches of note during his driving career and no breaches of any rules in relation to his training.
25. Mr Bond stated that he agreed with the tabled and read summary of facts.
Penalty Submissions:
26. The respondent is Mr. Lyndon James Bond, aged 45 years who is the holder of a Public Trainer’s Licence and Graduation Horseman’s licence pursuant to the Rules of New Zealand Harness Racing.
27. Mr. Bond resides and trains at Mataura in the Eastern Southland District.
28. Mr. Bond has been licenced with Harness Racing New Zealand since 1992.
29. Rule 505 (1) covers the requirements of horsemen’s responsibility in relation to betting in any race they are driving in. Rule 505 (2) states a breach of this rule is deemed to be a serious racing offence.
30. Mr Allison outlined the four principals of sentencing and are summarised briefly
• Penalties are designed to punish the offender for his/her wrong doing. They are not meant to be retributive in the sense that the punishment is disproportionate to the offence but the offender must be met with a punishment.
• In a racing context it is extremely important that a penalty has the effect of deterring others from committing similar offences.
• A penalty should also reflect the disapproval of the J.C.A for the type of behaviour in question.
• The need to rehabilitate the offender should be taken into account.
31. Mr Allison then produced relevant precedents in regards to similar breaches.
32. Relevant Precedents – Betting
RIU V WD O’CONNELL - 2 SEPTEMBER 2015
Mr O’Connell placed several bets at fixed odds. Mr O’Connell drives infrequently and advised he was not aware of the change in the betting rule introduced in 2014. Mr O’Connell admitted the breach and was suspended for 4 months.
RIU V N RASMUSSEN - 18 DECEMBER 2015
Ms. Rasmussen was charged with 3 breaches of the rule. The bets were placed in Group 1 races including the NZ Cup and the 3 year old Sires Stakes Final. Ms Rasmussen admitted the breach and was fined $3,750.
RIU V M JONES - 3 MARCH 2013
Mr. Jones placed a $100 bet on himself in the drivers challenge. Mr. Jones admitted the breach and was fined $500.
RIU V M KERR - 11 JANUARY 2015
Mr. Kerr placed a $100 all up bet starting with his drive in the first leg. Mr. Kerr admitted the breach and was fined $650.
33. Mr Allison then outlined the following aggravating features.
34. Mr. Bond initially denied placing the bets and stated it was his wife who placed the bets. The RIU believe this is a strong aggravating feature regarding the enquiry where Mr. Bond has not initially been truthful to the Racing Investigator.
35. Mr. Bond has placed his wife in a difficult situation by implicating her as the person who placed the bets on his account.
36. Mr. Bond is experienced in the Harness Racing industry and should be aware of the relevant rules.
37. A breach of Rule 505 (1) is deemed to be a serious racing offence.
38. The bets placed were not insignificant.
39. Mr Allison then outlined mitigating features for this breach.
40. Mr. Bond did acknowledge his actions albeit after strong evidence was presented to him.
41. Mr. Bond has no previous breaches of this rule.
42. There were no concerns with the manner Mr Bond drove EXPLOSIVE STAR which comfortably won the race.
43. Mr Bond has admitted the breach of the rule at the first opportunity which has resulted in this matter being dealt with on a race day.
44. The Racing Integrity Unit would be seeking a fine in the vicinity of $800.
45. The Racing Integrity Unit does not make an application for any costs.
46. Mr Bond admitted that he had made an error of judgement. When first approached by Mr Allison he had a rush of blood and denied his involvement, putting the onus on his wife. After some thought he returned and advised to Mr Allison his full involvement.
47. Mr Bond confirmed that he and his wife had fulltime employment at the Mataura freezing works.
48. Mr Bond he had 6 horses in work, 3 trotters and 3 pacers of which only one was about to resume racing in the near future.
49. Mr Bond stated that he only drove his trotters and left the pacers to the professional drivers.
50. Mr Bond sought a term of suspension in comparsion to a fine. He stated that he lived with his wife and 4 children and operated the training facility on a 40 acre block of land, formally with his father who was injured in race accident a few years ago, and now has limited involvement.
51. All of the 6 horses are either owned by himself or his father, so all costs for the horses are met by Mr Bond and his father.
Decision:
52. Mr Bond has admitted the breach of r 505(1) and (2). We thus find the breach proved in accordance with r 1001(a) (b) and (c). The JCA Penalty Guide does not indicate a starting point for a breach of this rule.
53. We are satisfied that Mr Bond has acted in ignorance of the Rules. Ignorance of the law is of course no excuse.
54. The integrity of Harness Racing is an issue in this case, but the committee agrees with Mr Allison’s evidence that the breach at the lower end of the scale. Significantly, Mr Bond did not bet against his own horse, but both the bets placed (2 x $100) were significant in value and were successful bets to the value of $620, a profit of $420.
55. We give regard to his unblemished record in respect of any matter that might pertain to the current charge. We also note his co-operation with the RIU investigation and his belated open and frank admission of the breach.
56. We have to hold Mr Bond accountable for his omission to keep abreast of the Rules of Harness Racing, which has led him to be in breach of the Rules. While we are aware that fines of $500 and $650 were imposed on drivers Jones and Kerr where the circumstances of the breach were similar to those before us. In so determining, we have had regard to the fact that r 505(2) declares a breach of r 505(1) to be a serious racing offence.
57. Mr Bond only drives very infrequently, and as he stated only the stable trotters, which has made the determination of the appropriate penalty more difficult than had he been a regular driver. Mr Bond’s record indicates that he had 285 lifetime drives as at 3rd November 2016, for 6 wins, 5 seconds and 14 third placings. We understand he has not driven since that time.
58. In our view, we are required by the need for the penalty to place emphasis on the integrity of Harness Racing, to make this decision a deterrent to all licence holders as this charge is a serious racing offence.
59. After careful consideration, we do not believe a suspension is a feasible or indeed appropriate penalty in this particular instance. This is due to the fact that Mr Bond currently has a small team in work at varying degrees of race readiness and the fact that he rarely drives.
60. We have taken into account the two relevant cases of similar breaches, RIU v Jones and RIU v Kerr. We note that Mr Bond has invested twice the amount as these two cases. We also took into account Mr Bond’s initial reluctance and disguising of the breach, placing his wife is a difficult situation, before his admission was made.
61. Therefore, we start our penalty at $1200 and give Mr Bond credit for his belated admission and his unblemished record in respect of any matter that might pertain to the current charge.
62. Mr Bond is therefore fined the sum $1000.
63. The RIU does not seek costs as the hearing was held on a raceday prior to the commencement of Race 1.
Dated at Invercargill this 20th day of November 2016.
N.D.Skelt
Chairman.
Appeal Decision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
Decision Date: 21/11/2016
Publish Date: 21/11/2016
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: d898b1f3561a5a176718b45c849db3e0
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 21/11/2016
hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v L J Bond - Decision dated 20 November 2016 - Chair, Mr N Skelt
charge:
facts:
appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF
THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY
UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003
AND IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing
BETWEEN RACING INTEGRITY UNIT (RIU)
Informant
AND LYNDON JAMES BOND, Graduation Horseman
Respondent
Information No: A6638
Judicial Committee: Mr N.D Skelt, Chairman - Mr V.G Munro, Committee Member
Appearing: Mr C Allison, for the Informant
The Respondent.
Date of hearing: 20 November 2016.
DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
1. The respondent Mr Lyndon James Bond is currently licensed as a Graduation Horseman and he has a Public Trainer’s Licence.
2. On the 1st of October 2016 at Mataura, Lyndon James Bond being the holder of a Graduation Horseman’s licence, did bet on a horse namely EXPLOSIVE STAR in a race, namely Race 1, The Tony Stratford Racing Stables/Willy’s Flooring Handicap Trot at the Northern Southland Trotting Club race meeting held at Ascot Park Raceway Invercargill in which race he drove the horse EXPLOSIVE STAR having placed 2 final field place bets, for $100 each @ $3.10 on EXPLOSIVE STAR in breach of Rule 505(1) and (2) which is declared to be a serious racing offence and you are therefore liable to the penalties which may be imposed in accordance with Rule 1001 (2)(a)(b) and (c) of the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing.
3. The relevant rules are:
505(1) A horseman may not bet on any horse or combination of horses in a race, in which he or she is driving;
(2) A breach of this sub-rule (1) is declared to be a serious racing offence;
1001(2) Every person who commits a serious racing offence shall be liable to the following penalties:
(a) a fine not exceeding $30,000; and/or
(b) suspension from holding or obtaining a licence, for any specific period or for life; and/or
(c) disqualification for a specific period or for life.
(3) The Judicial Committee may in addition to or substitution of any penalty imposed under sub-rule (2) hereof disqualify from any race and/or for any specific period or for life any horse connected with the serious racing offence.
4. Mr Allison produced written authority from the General Manager RIU, Mr. Mike Godber, in a letter dated 4th November 2016, to file an information alleging a breach of Rule 505(1).
5. Mr Bond confirmed to the committee that he admitted the breach of Rule 505(1).
The Facts:
6. Mr. Bond has driven in a total of 285 races (as at 3rd November 2016) for 6 wins, 5 seconds and 14 third placings.
7. Mr. Bond had correctly entered EXPLOSIVE START in Race 1 the Tony Stratford Racing Stables/Big Willy’s Flooring Handicap Trot at the Northern Southland Trotting Club meeting held on Saturday the 1st of October 2016 at Ascot Park Raceway.
8. EXPLOSIVE STAR is a 6 year old gelding which is trained and was driven by Mr. Bond to win the race by a length and three quarters. EXPLOSIVE STAR was 6/6 in the betting and paid $13.80 to win and $3.60 for a place. EXPLOSIVE STAR won $3,575 winning stake money.
9. EXPLOSIVE STAR has had a total of 38 starts for 2 wins 4 seconds and 1 third for total stake money of $15,518 as at the 3rd of November 2016.
10. EXPLOSIVE STAR was recently leased to race by Mr. Bonds father Mr. Jimmy Bond on the 14th of September 2016.
11. The Racing Integrity Unit Betting Analyst was requested to make enquiries in relation to Mr. Bond’s TAB account by Racing Investigators following this race.
12. The enquiries confirmed Mr. Bond had made the bets as listed below.
13. At 9.03am on Saturday the 1st of October Mr. Lyndon Bond has placed a $100 bet on fixed odds place betting on EXPLOSIVE STAR at $3.10 to win $310 via the internet on his own TAB account.
14. At 9.04am Mr. Bond has placed another bet on EXPLOSIVE STAR of $100 on fixed odds place betting again at odds of $3.10 to win $310 via the internet on his TAB account.
15. As a result of those bets Mr. Bond received $620 for an outlay of $200 with a $420 profit.
16. When questioned regarding the betting Mr. Bond initially denied making the bets and alleged it was his wife who had placed them on using his TAB account.
17. He later admitted making the bets after further evidence was obtained and put to him.
18. Mr. Bond admitted he had placed the 2 bets on the morning of the races on his wife’s cell phone. He had intended to put $100 to win and $100 for a place on EXPLOSIVE STAR on fixed odds but he had made a mistake during the transaction and instead placed the 2 place bets for $100 each.
19. Mr. Bond claimed he was not fully aware of the betting rules and thought he may have been allowed to place bets on his own horse.
20. Mr. Bond stated he wasn’t great at keeping up with relevant rule changes as he only drives occasionally.
21. In explanation for making the bets Mr. Bond believed the rule was unfair because the connections of horses should be able to make some money from a bet due to the knowledge they had of the horses lead up training.
22. The rule in relation to horsemen betting on races they drive in was introduced in April 2014 where they are unable to bet on any race they drive in. The previous driving rule allowed drivers to bet on their own horse they were driving.
23. There were no concerns regarding the manner Mr. Bond drove EXPLOSIVE STAR which won the race convincingly.
24. Mr. Bond does not have any breaches of note during his driving career and no breaches of any rules in relation to his training.
25. Mr Bond stated that he agreed with the tabled and read summary of facts.
Penalty Submissions:
26. The respondent is Mr. Lyndon James Bond, aged 45 years who is the holder of a Public Trainer’s Licence and Graduation Horseman’s licence pursuant to the Rules of New Zealand Harness Racing.
27. Mr. Bond resides and trains at Mataura in the Eastern Southland District.
28. Mr. Bond has been licenced with Harness Racing New Zealand since 1992.
29. Rule 505 (1) covers the requirements of horsemen’s responsibility in relation to betting in any race they are driving in. Rule 505 (2) states a breach of this rule is deemed to be a serious racing offence.
30. Mr Allison outlined the four principals of sentencing and are summarised briefly
• Penalties are designed to punish the offender for his/her wrong doing. They are not meant to be retributive in the sense that the punishment is disproportionate to the offence but the offender must be met with a punishment.
• In a racing context it is extremely important that a penalty has the effect of deterring others from committing similar offences.
• A penalty should also reflect the disapproval of the J.C.A for the type of behaviour in question.
• The need to rehabilitate the offender should be taken into account.
31. Mr Allison then produced relevant precedents in regards to similar breaches.
32. Relevant Precedents – Betting
RIU V WD O’CONNELL - 2 SEPTEMBER 2015
Mr O’Connell placed several bets at fixed odds. Mr O’Connell drives infrequently and advised he was not aware of the change in the betting rule introduced in 2014. Mr O’Connell admitted the breach and was suspended for 4 months.
RIU V N RASMUSSEN - 18 DECEMBER 2015
Ms. Rasmussen was charged with 3 breaches of the rule. The bets were placed in Group 1 races including the NZ Cup and the 3 year old Sires Stakes Final. Ms Rasmussen admitted the breach and was fined $3,750.
RIU V M JONES - 3 MARCH 2013
Mr. Jones placed a $100 bet on himself in the drivers challenge. Mr. Jones admitted the breach and was fined $500.
RIU V M KERR - 11 JANUARY 2015
Mr. Kerr placed a $100 all up bet starting with his drive in the first leg. Mr. Kerr admitted the breach and was fined $650.
33. Mr Allison then outlined the following aggravating features.
34. Mr. Bond initially denied placing the bets and stated it was his wife who placed the bets. The RIU believe this is a strong aggravating feature regarding the enquiry where Mr. Bond has not initially been truthful to the Racing Investigator.
35. Mr. Bond has placed his wife in a difficult situation by implicating her as the person who placed the bets on his account.
36. Mr. Bond is experienced in the Harness Racing industry and should be aware of the relevant rules.
37. A breach of Rule 505 (1) is deemed to be a serious racing offence.
38. The bets placed were not insignificant.
39. Mr Allison then outlined mitigating features for this breach.
40. Mr. Bond did acknowledge his actions albeit after strong evidence was presented to him.
41. Mr. Bond has no previous breaches of this rule.
42. There were no concerns with the manner Mr Bond drove EXPLOSIVE STAR which comfortably won the race.
43. Mr Bond has admitted the breach of the rule at the first opportunity which has resulted in this matter being dealt with on a race day.
44. The Racing Integrity Unit would be seeking a fine in the vicinity of $800.
45. The Racing Integrity Unit does not make an application for any costs.
46. Mr Bond admitted that he had made an error of judgement. When first approached by Mr Allison he had a rush of blood and denied his involvement, putting the onus on his wife. After some thought he returned and advised to Mr Allison his full involvement.
47. Mr Bond confirmed that he and his wife had fulltime employment at the Mataura freezing works.
48. Mr Bond he had 6 horses in work, 3 trotters and 3 pacers of which only one was about to resume racing in the near future.
49. Mr Bond stated that he only drove his trotters and left the pacers to the professional drivers.
50. Mr Bond sought a term of suspension in comparsion to a fine. He stated that he lived with his wife and 4 children and operated the training facility on a 40 acre block of land, formally with his father who was injured in race accident a few years ago, and now has limited involvement.
51. All of the 6 horses are either owned by himself or his father, so all costs for the horses are met by Mr Bond and his father.
Decision:
52. Mr Bond has admitted the breach of r 505(1) and (2). We thus find the breach proved in accordance with r 1001(a) (b) and (c). The JCA Penalty Guide does not indicate a starting point for a breach of this rule.
53. We are satisfied that Mr Bond has acted in ignorance of the Rules. Ignorance of the law is of course no excuse.
54. The integrity of Harness Racing is an issue in this case, but the committee agrees with Mr Allison’s evidence that the breach at the lower end of the scale. Significantly, Mr Bond did not bet against his own horse, but both the bets placed (2 x $100) were significant in value and were successful bets to the value of $620, a profit of $420.
55. We give regard to his unblemished record in respect of any matter that might pertain to the current charge. We also note his co-operation with the RIU investigation and his belated open and frank admission of the breach.
56. We have to hold Mr Bond accountable for his omission to keep abreast of the Rules of Harness Racing, which has led him to be in breach of the Rules. While we are aware that fines of $500 and $650 were imposed on drivers Jones and Kerr where the circumstances of the breach were similar to those before us. In so determining, we have had regard to the fact that r 505(2) declares a breach of r 505(1) to be a serious racing offence.
57. Mr Bond only drives very infrequently, and as he stated only the stable trotters, which has made the determination of the appropriate penalty more difficult than had he been a regular driver. Mr Bond’s record indicates that he had 285 lifetime drives as at 3rd November 2016, for 6 wins, 5 seconds and 14 third placings. We understand he has not driven since that time.
58. In our view, we are required by the need for the penalty to place emphasis on the integrity of Harness Racing, to make this decision a deterrent to all licence holders as this charge is a serious racing offence.
59. After careful consideration, we do not believe a suspension is a feasible or indeed appropriate penalty in this particular instance. This is due to the fact that Mr Bond currently has a small team in work at varying degrees of race readiness and the fact that he rarely drives.
60. We have taken into account the two relevant cases of similar breaches, RIU v Jones and RIU v Kerr. We note that Mr Bond has invested twice the amount as these two cases. We also took into account Mr Bond’s initial reluctance and disguising of the breach, placing his wife is a difficult situation, before his admission was made.
61. Therefore, we start our penalty at $1200 and give Mr Bond credit for his belated admission and his unblemished record in respect of any matter that might pertain to the current charge.
62. Mr Bond is therefore fined the sum $1000.
63. The RIU does not seek costs as the hearing was held on a raceday prior to the commencement of Race 1.
Dated at Invercargill this 20th day of November 2016.
N.D.Skelt
Chairman.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Non-race day
Rules:
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
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: