LEGENDARY trainer Nicky Henderson has been fined thousands by the British Horseracing Authority due to a ‘clerical error’ concerning six horses.
Racing’s governing body turned up at Henderson‘s Seven Barrows yard in October last year to perform out of competition testing on a number of horses.
Six horses were selected for sampling and whereabouts checks – but none of them was at the yard.
It turned out the six horses remained in the horses in training (HIT) list, even though they had left the yard and were not expected to race again in the future.
The six horses involved were former Haydock chase winner Issuing Authority, an unnamed Aroka filly, seven-time winner Quick Draw, Meadowsuite, She Can Do It and Queen’s Cave, owned by Kenny Alexander and eventually listed as ‘returned to owner’ on May 9 2022.
Under BHA guidelines it is a breach of the rules not to update the HIT list.
As the trainer and therefore responsible person for each horse, it was Henderson’s duty to keep the HIT list up to date, even if it was known at the time the six horses would not be returning or racing in future.
Henderson said the failure to do so had been an ‘internal slip’ and ‘clerical error’.
The result of the fast-track hearing read: “On the basis that Mr Henderson has failed to update the status and location of six horses, the BHA submits that a penalty must therefore be imposed.
“Mr Henderson has no previous offences under Rule (K)7 of the Rules of Racing.
“However, the BHA considers the number of horses involved and the time since the horses actually left Mr Henderson’s licensed premises to be aggravating features.
“Therefore, the BHA has proposed a global penalty of £2,500, incorporating both breaches of Rule (D)34 and (K)7.
“Mr Henderson has accepted that proposed penalty.
“Mr Henderson’s position is that the error arose because the horses had retired from racing and had left Mr Henderson’s yard on their retirement from the sport and prior to pursuing second careers unconnected with horseracing.
“Mr Henderson believes that the error in not providing notification that the horses had left his care came about in part at least as a consequence of those horses having retired from racing and no longer being connected to or with the sport.”
This was found to be the case by judicial panel member Philippa Charles too, who agreed a £2,500 fine would adequate for Henderson’s breach of two rules.
Summing up, she said: “On the facts, it appears that this was a straightforward clerical error which arose because the horses were leaving racing at the time when they left Mr Henderson’s Yard.
“None of them has raced since (indeed of the six horses involved, one never raced at all and one never raced for Mr Henderson).
“Had they remained in the sport it is likely that the information concerning their location and Responsible Person would have been updated much sooner as the discrepancy would have come to light had they been entered for other races.
“The importance of record-keeping is particularly significant where horses remain involved in the sport so that they can be subject to the usual anti-doping procedures and inspections.
“No wider issue has arisen in this case because the horses are no longer involved in the sport.
“I am therefore content to agree that the Fast Track Procedure should apply, and approve the agreed penalty of £2,500.”
