Non Raceday Inquiry – Written Decision dated 27 January 2025 – Fraser Auret

INTRODUCTION:

(1) This is a Written Decision arising as a result of issue of Information A16941 which outlined a breach of Rule 404(2).

Particulars of the resultant charge are that the Respondent:

On the 03rd of December 2024 at Woodville, Fraser Auret, the trainer and person responsible for the nomination, presented the unnamed 4yo gelding Unusual Suspect- Countessdelgatie to compete in Heat 16 of the Woodville Racing Clubs trials meeting, when he had nominated the 4yo gelding “Most Unusual” (Unusual Suspect – Delgatie Princess).

(2) This constitutes an offence under Rule 404(2) which 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.

(3) The Penalty for this offence arises under Rule 803(1) which provides:

A person who, or body or other entity which, commits or is deemed to have committed a breach of these Rules or any of them for which a penalty is not provided elsewhere in these Rules shall be liable to:

(a)  be disqualified for a period not exceeding 12 months; and/or

(b)  be suspended from holding or obtaining a Licence for a period not exceeding 12 months. If a Licence is renewed during a term of suspension, then the suspension shall continue to apply to the renewed Licence; and/or

(c)  a fine not exceeding $20,000.

(4) The Adjudicative Committee was provided with an Authority to Charge dated 14th January 2025 issued pursuant to Rule 903(2)(d).

(5) By virtue of that correspondence dated 12th January 2025, the Respondent admitted the breach. It was agreed that this matter be heard on the papers.

(6) The Adjudicative Committee issued a Minute on 23rd January 2025, seeking submissions as to penalty from both parties. Also sought, was confirmation from the Respondent that he agreed with the Summary of Facts dated 20th January 2025. Both were subsequently received.

SUMMARY OF FACTS

Salient details are as follows:

(7) Fraser Auret is a Licenced Class A Trainer. He has held a Trainer’s Licence since 2005.

(8) In February 2021 two Letham Thoroughbred Stud colt foals were identified and registered as:

A. Unusual Suspect – Delgatie Princess; LT in a circle; 4 over 0

B. Unusual Suspect – Countessdelgatie; LT in a circle; 2 over 0

(9) The mares are full sisters and the colts were similar in appearance and markings.

(10) Mr Auret was given what he was told was horse ‘A’ as a yearling to educate and pre train by breeder and principal of Letham Stud. What was believed to be horse ‘B’ was sent to an educator in the Waikato before eventually also being sent to Mr Auret to pre train.

(11) What was believed to be horse ‘A’ was later named’ Most Unusual’.

(12) Mr Auret entered and ran ‘Most Unusual’ in Heat 15 of the Foxton Trials on 28 November 2023.

(13) The RIB Steward responsible for checking brands that day did not identify the discrepancy – being both horses branded LT in a circle with the right shoulder numbers differing 4/0 (‘Most Unusual’) and 2/0 (Countessdelgatie’). The result of this trial has since been corrected by NZTR.

(14) On 03 December 2024, the Respondent again entered what he believed was ‘Most Unusual’ in Heat 16 of the Woodville RC Trials at Woodville Racecourse.

(15) The Stewards checking brands this time identified the discrepancy, confirmed via microchip reading and after completing inquiries the horse was scratched from the trial.

(16) In explanation Mr Auret stated that the mistake in identity occurred before the horses entered the stable and he was given incorrect information with regard to their respective dam’s name.

(17) Mr Auret has no previous NRI charges.

DECISION:

(18) As the charge has been admitted, it is found proved.

SUBMISSION AS TO PENALTY – INFORMANT

(19) A written Penalty Submission was provided by Mr Simon Irving, as Informant on behalf of the Racing Integrity Board.

(20)  The RIB identified ‘standard’ penalty for this type of breach in the equine codes is $400-$500, from an $800 starting point as outlined within the NZTR Penalty Guidelines.

(21) In support of the aforementioned, the submission identified precedent by way of some 5 Decisions (Thoroughbred and Harness), where a breach was specific to trial meetings.

(22) The submission outlined 5 mitigating factors:

• The principal of Letham Stud has provided a statement taking responsibility for the mistake.
• There was absolutely no intent by Mr Auret to deceive the betting public, owners or prospective buyers.
• The breach related to a trial rather than race.
• Mr Auret has been fully cooperative throughout the investigation and admitted the charge at the earliest opportunity.
• Mr Auret has derived his livelihood from training racehorses and has an unblemished career spanning 20 years.

(23) Costs were not sought.

SUBMISSION AS TO PENALTY – RESPONDENT

(24) Mr Auret provided a submission in which he contended the following mitigating factors:

• A lot of parties have missed the oversight
• It was my first mistake of this nature
• I have a very clean record spanning 20 years
• I have changed protocols to try and avoid any recurrence

PENALTY DETERMINATION:

(25) In determining appropriate penalty, the Adjudicative Committee is required to suitably deliberate upon the agreed Summary of Facts, respective submissions along with precedent.

(26) The NZTR Penalty Guide dated March 2024 provides for a starting point of an $800 fine for a breach of this particular Rule. This is deemed the appropriate starting point.

(27) There are no aggravating factors to consider.

(28) The Adjudicative Committee is satisfied that there was not any intent to deceive (nor has it been inferred at any point throughout this process).

(29) In referencing precedent, it is accepted that in each case, penalty was set was dependent upon individual circumstance. There is limited precedent with those of best interest, being RIU v Liefting (2020) – $400 fine and RIB v Liefting (2022) – $700 fine (second breach).

(30) It is accepted that the RIB Steward working at the Foxton Trials on 28 November 2023, should have identified the discrepancy. However, this error is not considered to be a factor in mitigating penalty. Ultimately (and despite the oversight of other parties), it remains an obligation of the Trainer to exercise the required care in identifying horses entering the stable. To this end, the Adjudicative Committee notes Mr Auret has purchased a scanner to help prevent a repeat of this mistake.

(31) Mitigating factors acknowledged in determining penalty include, Mr Auret’s ready admission and compliance throughout the process, along with his exemplary record.  A 40% discount is applied to the starting point, with a resultant fine of $480 deemed appropriate.

PENALTY AND COSTS:

(32) The Adjudicative Committee imposes a fine of $480. Given the matter has been dealt with on the papers, there is no order as to costs.