Non Raceday Inquiry – Written Decision dated 5 November 2022 – Philip Burrows

ID: RIB12247

Respondent(s):
Philip Burrows - Trainer

Applicant:
Mrs K Williams - RIB Investigator

Adjudicators:
Dave Anderson

Persons Present:
P Burrows, K Williams

Information Number:
A15831

Decision Type:
Race Related Charge

Charge:
Presenting an incorrect horse.

Rule(s):
502A(2) - Wrong animal notification

Plea:
Admitted

Animal Name:
RAKERO SLAMMER / RAKERO SCOTTY

Code:
Harness

Race Date:
06/10/2022

Race Club:
NZ Metropolitan Trotting Club Inc

Race Location:
Addington Raceway - 75 Jack Hinton Drive, Addington, Christchurch, 8024

Race Number:
R5

Hearing Date:
04/11/2022

Hearing Location:
Rangiora Raceway

Outcome: Proved

Penalty: Trainer Philip Burrows is fined $500

CHARGE:

On Thursday 6 October 2022, at Addington Raceway Philip Benjamin Burrows presented for Race 5 the horse RAKERO SLAMMER instead of RAKERO SCOTTY. The horse was scratched from the event by order of the Stipendiary Stewards under Rule 213(1)(h).

Rule 502A(2):

The Trainer and person in control of the horse at the race meeting shall ensure the correct horse is presented to start in the race in which it is entered.

Authorisation for the charge to proceed was given by RIB Chief Executive Mr Mike Clement.

SUMMARY OF FACTS:

1. The Respondent Philip Benjamin BURROWS is a Licensed Public Trainer under the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing (HRNZ). He is 51 years old, and has held a Trainer’s licence since 1995/96 and has trained 219 winners.

2. Mr Burrows trains the 2YO brown gelding RAKERO SCOTTY (Rock N Roll Heaven – Citylight); Brand – 190218; Markings – white off-hind coronet.

3. Mr Burrows also trains the 2YO bay gelding RAKERO SLAMMER (Rock N Roll Heaven – Dolce Denario); Brand 190210; Markings – white star.

4. Both of these horses were purchased from the February 2021 National Standardbred Yearling Sales in Christchurch and renamed. RAKERO SCOTTY was previously called MY RACE RULER and RAKERO SLAMMER was called KRUZ SHARD.

5. Mr Burrows lodged a signed Trainer Notification with HRNZ on 09 May 2022. RAKERO SCOTTY and RAKERO SLAMMER were two of seven horses notified. The brands on the form were written as numbers, as opposed to symbols.

6. On the Trainer Notification it states: IMPORTANT NOTE: All details required on this form must be completed, including the Brand. This form will NOT BE PROCESSED unless all details are provided. By signing the form, you are declaring that the brand has been checked off the horse’s neck, and details are true and correct.

7. RAKERO SCOTTY was presented at the North Canterbury TOA Trials on 17 August and was inspected by Stewards with HRNZ being advised that the horse had a star that was not present on the papers and that the last symbol of the bottom line looked like a horizontal line which is the symbol for ‘0’. The correct brand should have been a ‘v’ to the right.

8. HRNZ changed the details for the horse presented as RAKERO SCOTTY and did not check that the brand may have been for another horse.

9. RAKERO SCOTTY was again presented at the North Canterbury TOA Trials on 31 August, the 14 September and 21 September.

10. Mr Burrows presented RAKERO SCOTTY at the NZMTC race meeting on 06 October where it was pre-race blood tested and the brand was queried. The brand and markings on the horse matched the horse RAKERO SLAMMER, not RAKERO SCOTTY.

11. The horse was scratched from the race by order of the Stipendiary Stewards per Rule 213(1)(h).

12. The connections viewed the footage from the yearling sales and conceded that the horse presented was RAKERO SLAMMER instead of RAKERO SCOTTY.

13. The brand and markings for RAKERO SCOTTY were confirmed as correct on 07 October. This horse is currently turned out.

14. A hair sample was taken from RAKERO SLAMMER and sent for DNA parentage testing with a positive confirmation received on 12 October.

Mr Burrows stated he had read and agreed with the summary of facts and confirmed to the Adjudicative Committee he was conversant with the Rule and the Charge.

PLEA:

As the charge was admitted it was deemed proved.

PENALTY SUBMISSIONS:

Informant:

1. The Respondent Philip Benjamin BURROWS is a Licensed Public Trainer under the Rules of Harness Racing New Zealand. He has held a Trainers licence since 1995/96.

2. He has admitted a breach of the Rules in relation to presenting the Standardbred RAKERO SLAMMER instead of RAKERO SCOTTY at the NZMTC meeting on 06 October 2022.

3. The penalties which apply to this case are detailed under Rule 1003(1):

1003(1)

A person who commits a breach of any Rule shall be liable to the following penalties:
(a) a fine not exceeding $10,000.00; and/or
(b) suspension from holding or obtaining a licence for a period not exceeding 12
months; and/or
(c) disqualification for a period not exceeding 12 months.

In addition to or in substitution of any penalty imposed pursuant to sub-rule (1) hereof, any horse connected with the breach of the Rule may be scratched or disqualified from any race and/or disqualified for a period not exceeding 12 months.

4. Aggravating Factors

a. Mr Burrows has been a Public Trainer for a considerable number of years and should have confirmed the identities of the two horses when they entered his stable by checking the brands on their necks.

b. Mr Burrows should have rechecked the brands on the horses’ necks when lodging the Trainer Notification with HRNZ.

c. The horse, RAKERO SLAMMER, had one workout and three trial starts under the incorrect name.

d. Due to the fact that the horse’s details had been changed by HRNZ, with notes added about the markings and brand, the horse could have raced for a considerable time before the mistake was identified when (and only if) the other horse was presented at the trials.

5. Mitigating Factors

a. Mr Burrows has been cooperative throughout the RIB process and has admitted the charge at the first available opportunity.

b. The issue should have been identified at the trials when the brand and markings were queried with HRNZ, resulting in the incorrect horse only ever having one workout. The result would have meant Mr Burrows would have presented the incorrect horse at the trials instead of the races, commanding a lesser penalty.

c. There was no malicious intent by Mr Burrows but a case of mistaken identity.

d. Mr Burrows has no previous breaches of this Rule.

6. The following cases of presenting the wrong horse on a race day may provide guidance regarding penalty:

HARNESS

• RIU v S G Lock (2020) – presented incorrect horse at Invercargill HRC – fined $700.
• RIU v N B Edge (2013) – presented incorrect horse at Forbury Park TC- fined $800.
• RIU v G C Small (2013) – presented incorrect horse at Ashburton TC – fined $550.

THOROUGHBRED

• RIU v K Knight (2020) – presented incorrect horse at Ruakaka – fined $500.
• RIU v K Moore (2020) – presented incorrect horse at Timaru RC – fined $500.

7. Conclusion

When determining penalty, the RIB submit that the Adjudicative Committee have regard to the purpose of the proceedings, which include: to ensure the Rules are complied with; to uphold and maintain the high standards expected of Trainers, and to protect the integrity of Harness Racing, gives confidence to the betting public that the correct horses race.

The RIB also submits that the breach can be dealt with by way of a monetary penalty.

The RIB submits that the mistake should have been detected had Mr Burrows checked the horses’ brands when they commenced training and when notifying HRNZ, therefore the appropriate penalty is an $800 fine.

8. The RIB is not seeking costs.

PENALTY SUBMISSIONS:

Respondent:

Mr Burrows said he takes full responsibility for the mistake but in mitigation he pointed out he had no contact with the two horses until after they were broken in. He said the mix-up in identity had been made prior to the horses entering his stable and it continued as he hadn’t checked the brands as he should have. Mr Burrows said both RAKERO SCOTTY and RAKERO SLAMMER are very similar being by the same sire and the brands could be easily misread as only one character is slightly different.

REASONS FOR PENALTY:

The Adjudicative Committee considered all of the submissions carefully.

Mr Burrows has been very open, and cooperative, and freely admits his mistake.

In this case, there have been a series of mistakes made.

Firstly, Mr Burrows not checking the horses’ brands as they were commencing training at his establishment.

Secondly, the Stewards at the North Canterbury TOA Trials, although noting the discrepancy, should have fully investigated the matter so as to be able to advise Mr Burrows that the horse presented was not RAKERO SCOTTY.

Thirdly, HRNZ should not have changed the details for RAKERO SCOTTY before checking the brand may have been for another horse.

If all concerned had been more diligent, the saga would have halted on 17 August 2022 and not progressed through to the race day on 6 October 2022. The Adjudicative Committee finds a lesser penalty than submitted by the Applicant in relation to the above factors, is in order.

CONCLUSION:

The Adjudicative Committee, in considering all factors, assesses a fine of $500 to be an appropriate penalty in this case.

COSTS:

No order of costs was imposed.

Decision Date: 04/11/2022

Publish Date: 08/11/2022