Chicago Barn to Wire BRIS
Home | News | Bloggers | Forums | Resources | Links | Marketplace | Gallery | Contact Us | Search


August 28, 2014, 12:31:06 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: If you don't remember your password, email me.

New  registration procedures -- Some ISPs have been bouncing the verification emails.  Please email me to be activated or if you have any problems.  Click Contact Us above.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Poll
Question: Lets say your in F.L your horse is in new york are you responsibile
Yes - 11 (44%)
No - 11 (44%)
Maybe - 3 (12%)
Total Voters: 18

Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Horse Talk ' Owner Ship responsibility for a horse with a trainer Yes or No  (Read 6470 times)
MercedesMan
Guest

« on: February 04, 2008, 02:15:32 PM »

You have your horse with a trainer you pay him a training bill. Something happens to him or any thing, Like not feed dirty stalls trainer gets caught using drugs. Sould you as a owner also be held responsibile as the owner of the horse even tho you never new about any of it ? And should they held responsibile if some one gets hurt by there horse such as trainer ,, groom, or any one else ? trotter
« Last Edit: February 04, 2008, 02:39:18 PM by MercedesMan » Report to moderator   Logged
MercedesMan
Guest

« Reply #1 on: February 04, 2008, 08:00:39 PM »

If you look at this can't you vote ? and lets here what you have to say on this.. trotter
Report to moderator   Logged
Kenneth J. Chadwick
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3047




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: February 04, 2008, 08:51:15 PM »

He's your agent.

You are responsible.

You may have exercise poor judgement, but that's too bad.

You pay the price.


Kenneth J. Chadwick
Report to moderator   Logged

It's a Wonderful Life, let's live every moment like its your last.
MercedesMan
Guest

« Reply #3 on: February 04, 2008, 08:53:30 PM »

Kenneth J. Chadwick , I feel the same way you do.Thank you  trotter
Report to moderator   Logged
HUNGARY
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 328




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2008, 09:11:28 AM »

MercedesMan...You must have read this article on the USTrotting website:   http://www.ustrotting.com/absolutenm/anmviewer.asp?a=25497&z=29

I voted No...as I feel that you are paying someone to look after your Horse...but according to the above article...I am wrong....it pays to have insurance!!!!!
Report to moderator   Logged
MercedesMan
Guest

« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2008, 10:39:11 AM »

HUNGARY, Yes i read allot but just cause they say its so i like to know what others think also we are not privy to there poles so i think its nice to see what real people think.  trotter
Report to moderator   Logged
HUNGARY
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 328




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2008, 11:34:35 AM »

I agree with you Mercedes....I like to see peoples opinion.  I am still in shock that a woman spilled hot coffee on her while at a Mcdonalds drive thru (her fault) and sues Mcdonalds and actually wins. 

A friend of mine was going to buy a T-Bred Horse...but he backed out of a deal with a group because they did not have any liability insurance. 
Report to moderator   Logged
MercedesMan
Guest

« Reply #7 on: February 05, 2008, 11:40:02 AM »

To this day i still don't understand how she won over Mcdonalds, Makes me wounder LLOL  trotter
Report to moderator   Logged
MercedesMan
Guest

« Reply #8 on: February 05, 2008, 03:10:49 PM »

Need more votes for this to count .  trotter
Report to moderator   Logged
Mel from Moline
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3145




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: February 05, 2008, 04:11:49 PM »

Yes, the owner is responsible. This is a business of choice. If you choose to have a guy who is in Florida for the winter and your horse comes up positive or has any other problem YOU ARE as responsible as he is. That's the game. If you don't like that aspect of it fins a local trainer in the area you are and live with it.
Report to moderator   Logged

Horses make the humans...not the other way around.
MercedesMan
Guest

« Reply #10 on: February 05, 2008, 06:05:20 PM »

Mo usedto, I feel the same as you, trotter
Report to moderator   Logged
Mo Doc N
Guest

« Reply #11 on: February 05, 2008, 09:22:12 PM »

HUNGARY, Yes i read allot but just cause they say its so i like to know what others think also we are not privy to there poles so i think its nice to see what real people think.  trotter

I WISH YOU WOULD READ WHAT YOU TYPE  Huh
Report to moderator   Logged
MercedesMan
Guest

« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2008, 09:39:51 PM »

Mo Doc N , Awwwwww don't be a hater.  trotter
Report to moderator   Logged
edwardwilliam
Annnnnnnnnd they're off!
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6252

Rebate shops are not the devil.


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2008, 12:13:02 PM »

I think there needs to be some discretion here.  If the trainer hasn't had a major positive in the past two or three years (not sure what the correct window should be), then no, the owner should not be held responsible -- at all.  They'll already have to return the purse money, which is punishment enough.

HOWEVER, if the trainer has gotten a major positive in the last couple years, the owner ABSOLUTELY should be held responsible.  They are selecting a trainer that they KNOW has a propensity to problems.

Best,
EW
Report to moderator   Logged

Stick to Fantasyland pal, because you'll NEVER make it in the real world - TC
Grinder
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2136




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2008, 12:35:58 PM »

You have your horse with a trainer you pay him a training bill. Something happens to him or any thing, Like not feed dirty stalls trainer gets caught using drugs.

Are you saying the trainer himself gets caught using drugs .... or your horse in his care tests positive?


Report to moderator   Logged

The more you bet...the more you win
Grinder
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2136




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2008, 12:43:51 PM »

In the 1994 McDonalds hot-coffee case, McDonalds appealed and won a reduction in the jurys award of 2,700,000 to $480,000.   They do serve their coffee (or did back then) at an admitted 20 degrees hotter than other restaurants, but this alone is not why they had to pay.  The jury did not like the large corporation refusing to help the 81 yr. old woman with her medical bills at all.  She then sued (1st time in her life she had ever brought suit against anyone) and THATS what the large reward in her favor was all about.

Some legal scholars refer to this case as a shining example of why we need tort-reform.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2008, 12:45:30 PM by Grinder » Report to moderator   Logged

The more you bet...the more you win
MercedesMan
Guest

« Reply #16 on: February 07, 2008, 01:51:39 PM »

Grinder, I have been racing along time and i have found that when a trainer gets a Pos he knows he did it and so dose every one else, So its the same thing, name the last time besides Dan Nances bull chit a trainer says know it was not us and they did not have to pay the fine ?  trotter
« Last Edit: February 08, 2008, 12:05:03 PM by MercedesMan » Report to moderator   Logged
njhorseman
Guest

« Reply #17 on: February 07, 2008, 05:00:27 PM »

I think there needs to be some discretion here.  If the trainer hasn't had a major positive in the past two or three years (not sure what the correct window should be), then no, the owner should not be held responsible -- at all.  They'll already have to return the purse money, which is punishment enough.

HOWEVER, if the trainer has gotten a major positive in the last couple years, the owner ABSOLUTELY should be held responsible.  They are selecting a trainer that they KNOW has a propensity to problems.

Best,
EW

EW:

I agree.

By the way...good to hear from you...you haven't posted here in months!
Report to moderator   Logged
Tsunami
Guest

« Reply #18 on: February 07, 2008, 08:02:18 PM »

EW,

Glad to see you missed the tornado's in Tennessee  Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
Grinder
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2136




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: February 07, 2008, 08:48:52 PM »

Grinder, I have been racing along time and i have found that when a trainer gets a Pos he knows he did it and so dose every one else, So its the same thing name the lkast time besides Dan Nances bull chit a trainer says know it was not us and they did not have to pay the fine ?  trotter

I would like to comment, but honestly cannot clearly understand what you are asking. Your typing is very difficult to follow.

But I also cannot see how an owner is liable for a positive test, with the ultimate-liability rule trainers agree to work under.  I believe that the owners problem should end with purse forfeiture.  If they want to deal with kinky trainers, they run that risk knowingly.  And if they are 100% honest, nice owners who get shafted by their trainer, they can leave him, and if he is found legally guilty by the horse racing board of that state, what would stop them from demanding reimbursement from that trainer?  They can sue him for the money.

Somehow, I'm having trouble believing an owner is culpable for his trainers schedule of medications, vet work, care, etc.

And if you are worried about exposure, just file and race under an LLC.

Report to moderator   Logged

The more you bet...the more you win
JOHN W
Full Member
***
Posts: 171




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: February 07, 2008, 09:02:30 PM »

I AM A BELIEVER IN THE FACT OF A HORSE BEING SUSPENDED TOO. THE OWNER REALLY DOES NOT HAVE CONTROL OVER WHAT HIS HORSE IS TREATED WITH. THE HORSE CANNOT CONTROL WHAT IT IS TREATED WITH BUT BY SUSPENDING THE HORSE THIS WILL MAKE A SHADY PERSON MAYBE THINK ABOUT WHAT THE HORSES IN THEIR CARE ARE TREATED WITH. DON'T FORGET THOUGH ABOUT SOME ONE ELSE FROM THE STREET MAYBE SLIPPING INTO THE HORSES STALL doh
Report to moderator   Logged
Balmoral Buddy
Guest

« Reply #21 on: February 07, 2008, 09:31:04 PM »

No matter who is responsible, the owner will get sued because he probably has "deeper pockets" than the groom or trainer. There are liability policies out there that cover your horse injuring another person if you merely own the horse and don't train him.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dolfan
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6058




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: February 08, 2008, 12:00:36 PM »

If you're talking insurance, that's one thing & it differs from state to state.

But as far as the owner being responsible for a trainers mis-use?  No way!  Each state licenses the trainers, which covers all of the necessities that you are speaking of, other than "accidents".  It is the state's responsibility to police the trainers, not the owners.

Most owners do not have the first clue on how to care for the horse or legally administer the legal drugs in the legal dosage, which is why the vet is also licensed and the owners get to pay the vets lots of money to do their jobs properly & legally.

The sport would not even exist if the owners, who are losing the majority of the money, were also to be held legally responsible for positives, as a result of the trainer - any trainer, that he chooses.  It doesn't matter if the trainer has 9 positives - if the state lets him train & race, the owner cannot & should not be held responsible. 
Report to moderator   Logged

We can produce more wealth, but we cannot produce more time.  When we give someone our time, we actually give a portion of our life that we will never get back.
njhorseman
Guest

« Reply #23 on: February 08, 2008, 12:32:13 PM »

If you're talking insurance, that's one thing & it differs from state to state.

But as far as the owner being responsible for a trainers mis-use?  No way!  Each state licenses the trainers, which covers all of the necessities that you are speaking of, other than "accidents".  It is the state's responsibility to police the trainers, not the owners.

Most owners do not have the first clue on how to care for the horse or legally administer the legal drugs in the legal dosage, which is why the vet is also licensed and the owners get to pay the vets lots of money to do their jobs properly & legally.

The sport would not even exist if the owners, who are losing the majority of the money, were also to be held legally responsible for positives, as a result of the trainer - any trainer, that he chooses.  It doesn't matter if the trainer has 9 positives - if the state lets him train & race, the owner cannot & should not be held responsible. 

I used to take the same position regarding owner responsibility, but it's pretty clear that it's a major contributing factor to the sport's spiraling free fall decline over the last 20 or 30 years.

The system for penalizing trainers is completely ineffective. They get set down and a beard instantaneously appears to take over the barn without missing a beat. When the days have been served, it's right back to business as usual by the trainer until the next positive.

When an owner knowingly employs a crook, he should be bear the consequences of that decision.

Report to moderator   Logged
Dolfan
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6058




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: February 08, 2008, 12:49:05 PM »

I used to take the same position regarding owner responsibility, but it's pretty clear that it's a major contributing factor to the sport's spiraling free fall decline over the last 20 or 30 years.

The system for penalizing trainers is completely ineffective. They get set down and a beard instantaneously appears to take over the barn without missing a beat. When the days have been served, it's right back to business as usual by the trainer until the next positive.

When an owner knowingly employs a crook, he should be bear the consequences of that decision.


Granted, that there are some bigger owners who are more hands-on but the majority of owners, big or small, are business people who love the sport & are trying not to lose money.  They therefore, try to use the most successful trainer, usually someone with a high win %. 

Obviously, if the system for penalizing trainers in ineffective, the system must be changed by the licensing bodies.  Make the penalties for positives much more severe - for everyone (no cherry-picking here, everyone!).

No "owner knowingly employs a crook" in any place of business, because we all figure the same thing - if a trainer is cheating this person, he's certainly going to be cheating me!  It's just pure logic.  Who's going to start buying horses, paying training bills, vet bills,... and use a trainer who wins 5%?  The money will run out pretty quickly.  And if an owner has to bear the responsibilities that come with watching the trainer's every move, then there will be no owners! 

The sport cannot win by holding owners responsible.  Period.
Report to moderator   Logged

We can produce more wealth, but we cannot produce more time.  When we give someone our time, we actually give a portion of our life that we will never get back.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.234 seconds with 19 queries.

Home
Upcoming events
Arlington Million
Horse slaughter in IL
Racing TV schedule
News Updates
Legislation

Galloping Out

Previous stories

Arlington
Balmoral
Hawthorne
Maywood
Chicago Sun-Times
Chicago Tribune
Blood-Horse
Daily Racing Form
Thoroughbred Times
Harness Link
Illinois Racing Board

 

2014

Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

2013

Breeders' Cup
Hawthorne Gold Cup
Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

2012

Breeders' Cup
Hawthorne Gold Cup
Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

More ebay items

 

Home | News Updates | Bloggers | Forums | Search
Resources | Links | Marketplace | Gallery | Advertising | Contact Us

Copyright © 2000-2014 Chicago Barn to Wire. All rights reserved.
Privacy policy