Australian
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Lost court case today, cost him $500k....apparenly for not properly informing an owner of an injury to a high-priced yearling.
Worrying precedent for a few trainers I would have thought.
Worrying precedent for a few trainers I would have thought.
Show More
poor bugger - may be a wake up to some others who just see them as livestock and the owners a necessary evil
there will be a cost passed on to all owners now by every trainer so they can insure themselves against this type of case. A profesisonal indemnity type clause. owners will be the real losers in this. Take the owners out of equation the industry fall to its knees. not good
no need for insurance or indemnities. Reminder to tell the truth....as they should.
Yearling sales are a disgrace and yet at the head of Racing NSW is a breeder.
There are that many rorts by trainers and vendors and bloodstock agents at sales it is beyond a joke
There are that many rorts by trainers and vendors and bloodstock agents at sales it is beyond a joke
Copped his right wak............ SHOULD HAVE told new owner truth instead of just pocketing commission from Breeder or Stud, RORTS like this have been going on for years.......... BUY MY HORSES AND WE WILL GIVE YOU A KICK BACK.......... BYE BYE JOHN....... FINALLY
This is a clean Industry Master...This sort of sh1t doesn't happen in the sport of kings lol ...Like fk it don't!....Well said Master.
Vieira had purchased 70% of Dashere who was a $330,000 purchase at the 2007 Magic Millions Sales.
The damages findings were determined on whether O'Shea informed Vieira 'the precise terms of the veterinary clinician's assessment' reported smh.com.au on Tuesday.
Randwick Equine Centre conducted a clinical inspection and X-ray assessment for O'Shea, which classed the colt was 'low risk with time' because of cystic lucency in its hind left stifle.
The classification was found to be an acknowledgment of a veterinary problem, which had not been passed on to Vieira said the report.
... strange one and a huge precedent you would think ...
hard to make head nor tail of the newspaper report ... the judge/magis abviously went into this
did the owner ask for a vet report ... was it not provided .. was a false report provided
no caveat emptor in horse buying
if i was parting with $200k+ ... i'd prob get an independent vet report myself
was the report john provided doctored ?
strange result an appeal overturning and original finding
more to come ???????
The damages findings were determined on whether O'Shea informed Vieira 'the precise terms of the veterinary clinician's assessment' reported smh.com.au on Tuesday.
Randwick Equine Centre conducted a clinical inspection and X-ray assessment for O'Shea, which classed the colt was 'low risk with time' because of cystic lucency in its hind left stifle.
The classification was found to be an acknowledgment of a veterinary problem, which had not been passed on to Vieira said the report.
... strange one and a huge precedent you would think ...
hard to make head nor tail of the newspaper report ... the judge/magis abviously went into this
did the owner ask for a vet report ... was it not provided .. was a false report provided
no caveat emptor in horse buying
if i was parting with $200k+ ... i'd prob get an independent vet report myself
was the report john provided doctored ?
strange result an appeal overturning and original finding
more to come ???????
pretty straight forward to m Thebas. Owner was lied to by omission of facts known to the trainer.
Simple contract law.
Simple contract law.
and...won't be an appeal....Throwing good money after bad...barristers aren't cheap
here's the transcript
http://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/action/PJUDG?jgmtid=157169
hard to see how O'Shea wasn't at fault, open and transparent is the key imo
http://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/action/PJUDG?jgmtid=157169
hard to see how O'Shea wasn't at fault, open and transparent is the key imo
cheers womble .. i'll have a look now
i wonder why this was only upheld on appeal then
why did the first ruling not favour the claimant if it was so straight forward ?
**************
owners: B Vieira, Mrs S G Vieira, T Vieira, Mrs C Vieira-Choy, H Vieira, R La Peyre, Mrs A La Peyre, Bangaloe Stud Sydnicate (MGR: MISS J RITCHIE).
the horse is a 6yo entire ... part owned by a stud
did the stud not sue also (or were THEY informed)
does the injury stop it from being a stallion ? ... or make it more likely to pass on a genetic weakness ?
a $500k payout for a $300k purchase ? (plus training & vet expenses and emotional distress i guess)
and does o'shea now own it lol ?
if not, he would have been better off giving them $300k as a 're-purchase' and owning it himself ?
i wonder why this was only upheld on appeal then
why did the first ruling not favour the claimant if it was so straight forward ?
**************
owners: B Vieira, Mrs S G Vieira, T Vieira, Mrs C Vieira-Choy, H Vieira, R La Peyre, Mrs A La Peyre, Bangaloe Stud Sydnicate (MGR: MISS J RITCHIE).
the horse is a 6yo entire ... part owned by a stud
did the stud not sue also (or were THEY informed)
does the injury stop it from being a stallion ? ... or make it more likely to pass on a genetic weakness ?
a $500k payout for a $300k purchase ? (plus training & vet expenses and emotional distress i guess)
and does o'shea now own it lol ?
if not, he would have been better off giving them $300k as a 're-purchase' and owning it himself ?
well you don't have to go too far into the reading womble do you ...
********
Q. Mr Vieira said to you, 'The vet says he is okay?'
A. Mr Vieira said to me?
Q. Yes.
A. How would Mr Vieira know that?
Q. He put that to you as a question. In effect he said to you, did the vet say he is okay?
A. Yes.
Q. He said that?
A. Yes.
Q. And you responded to him, 'Nothing wrong with him. The horse is good'?
A. Yes."
****
just on that alone ... how did the first case NEED to go to appeal lol ?
bad call john !
and now o'shea is counter-suing the vets ?????
********
Q. Mr Vieira said to you, 'The vet says he is okay?'
A. Mr Vieira said to me?
Q. Yes.
A. How would Mr Vieira know that?
Q. He put that to you as a question. In effect he said to you, did the vet say he is okay?
A. Yes.
Q. He said that?
A. Yes.
Q. And you responded to him, 'Nothing wrong with him. The horse is good'?
A. Yes."
****
just on that alone ... how did the first case NEED to go to appeal lol ?
bad call john !
and now o'shea is counter-suing the vets ?????
thats the guts of it imo
A. Because Mister - as I explained to Mr Vieira previously, and he concurred, we are dependent upon veterinary advice for our purchases. There is no such thing as a horse that is completely free of any issues. I say the word 'complete' in emphasis there and, as a result, I'm guided on matters such as these by my veterinary advice."
i wonder how may other potential buyers of the horse were privy ti the horses problem and if so were they concerned? (asuming the horse went to auction)
reckon he will win on appeal
A. Because Mister - as I explained to Mr Vieira previously, and he concurred, we are dependent upon veterinary advice for our purchases. There is no such thing as a horse that is completely free of any issues. I say the word 'complete' in emphasis there and, as a result, I'm guided on matters such as these by my veterinary advice."
i wonder how may other potential buyers of the horse were privy ti the horses problem and if so were they concerned? (asuming the horse went to auction)
reckon he will win on appeal
as I explained to Mr Vieira previously
LIH .. does this mean 'previously' to viera asking o'shea if the vet said the horse (dashere) was ok ?
LIH .. does this mean 'previously' to viera asking o'shea if the vet said the horse (dashere) was ok ?
Q. And you responded to him, 'Nothing wrong with him. The horse is good'?
A. Yes."
should be
A. has a minor issue that's pretty standard - just means we have to give him a little extra time which he'll need anyway
A. Yes."
should be
A. has a minor issue that's pretty standard - just means we have to give him a little extra time which he'll need anyway
would a vet 'pass' this unraced, unbroken yearling???
do vets make recommendations re the racability of yearlings these days??
do vets make recommendations re the racability of yearlings these days??
interesting stuff ... purely a LEGAL battle .. rather than a horse racing discussion ... opens up a can of worms for horse selling now
if viera was told .... and understood (if i was parting with $200k+ i would have done some due diligence on racehorses beforehand and tried to absorb what LIH posted below ... )
There is no such thing as a horse that is completely free of any issues.
that last statement NOW has to be on the front cover of every horse sales catalogue lol
spending $200k ... owner has do at little more than ask the (non vet) trainer imo
an agreement before purchase (for my $200k) would have been .. subject to an independent vet exam
if viera was told .... and understood (if i was parting with $200k+ i would have done some due diligence on racehorses beforehand and tried to absorb what LIH posted below ... )
There is no such thing as a horse that is completely free of any issues.
that last statement NOW has to be on the front cover of every horse sales catalogue lol
spending $200k ... owner has do at little more than ask the (non vet) trainer imo
an agreement before purchase (for my $200k) would have been .. subject to an independent vet exam
i think the relationship between owner and trainer needs to be looked at it
have they known each other previously? have they raced horses together before? that sort of thing.
the state of their relationship at the time would have had a bearing on the discussion and interruptations im sure.
it really is quite interesting imo
have they known each other previously? have they raced horses together before? that sort of thing.
the state of their relationship at the time would have had a bearing on the discussion and interruptations im sure.
it really is quite interesting imo
womble
Q. And you responded to him, 'Nothing wrong with him. The horse is good' ?
A. Yes."
should be
A. has a minor issue that's pretty standard - just means we have to give him a little extra time which he'll need anyway
****
fair point too womble ... seems the $200k changed hands pretty quick ... with little onus on the owner to check further ... but i could be wrong
legalese is a tricky topic ...
i mean .. in horse racing parlance .. what does 'good' actually mean ... what does the racing dictionary say about the 'range of suitability'
broken down & hopeless ... fair ... average ... good ... terrific .. fantastic ... perfect conformation
when someone says something is 'good'
does that mean above average, great, impeccable
i can't believe the owner didn't ask for a copy of the vets 'run-down' ... and then seek independent clarification as to the 'meaning' of the report ... but hey what's $200k amongst friends
and now
WHO owns the horse .. has o'shea got a 70% ownership stake now .. does viera relinquish all rights to the stallion ?
***
i agree LIH ... quite interesting this
Q. And you responded to him, 'Nothing wrong with him. The horse is good' ?
A. Yes."
should be
A. has a minor issue that's pretty standard - just means we have to give him a little extra time which he'll need anyway
****
fair point too womble ... seems the $200k changed hands pretty quick ... with little onus on the owner to check further ... but i could be wrong
legalese is a tricky topic ...
i mean .. in horse racing parlance .. what does 'good' actually mean ... what does the racing dictionary say about the 'range of suitability'
broken down & hopeless ... fair ... average ... good ... terrific .. fantastic ... perfect conformation
when someone says something is 'good'
does that mean above average, great, impeccable
i can't believe the owner didn't ask for a copy of the vets 'run-down' ... and then seek independent clarification as to the 'meaning' of the report ... but hey what's $200k amongst friends
and now
WHO owns the horse .. has o'shea got a 70% ownership stake now .. does viera relinquish all rights to the stallion ?
***
i agree LIH ... quite interesting this
dashere didnt have his first run until 3 months before his 6th birthday
Career: 6-1-0-1 : prize money $1,550
cant understand why the horse was valued so high, mum was a flop, dad was Dehere...
i'd be pissed off too.
Career: 6-1-0-1 : prize money $1,550
cant understand why the horse was valued so high, mum was a flop, dad was Dehere...
i'd be pissed off too.
counsel representing megsy: your honour ... my client is p!ssed off ... extremely p!ssed off
his honour: now counsel for mr megsy ... i see your horse has a 17% winning strike rate .. the first horse i was conned into .. ummm err ... decided to buy after assessing its pedigree .. never won a blasted race at all
counsel: but they promised me the world .. it was a magic millions sale
his honour: you should know by now mr megsy ... that there is no such thing as ... magic ... despite what the salespeople will tell you
counsel: i implore your honour ... the horse in question was bred by arrowfield stud ...
his honour (gasping for breath): oh my g0d ... mr messa ........ umm ... verdict in favour of mr megsy
his honour: now counsel for mr megsy ... i see your horse has a 17% winning strike rate .. the first horse i was conned into .. ummm err ... decided to buy after assessing its pedigree .. never won a blasted race at all
counsel: but they promised me the world .. it was a magic millions sale
his honour: you should know by now mr megsy ... that there is no such thing as ... magic ... despite what the salespeople will tell you
counsel: i implore your honour ... the horse in question was bred by arrowfield stud ...
his honour (gasping for breath): oh my g0d ... mr messa ........ umm ... verdict in favour of mr megsy
i won !...i won !!!!...yipeee
nerve racking stuff sitting in court
nerve racking stuff sitting in court
that race it won, must have been the clydesdale horses sprint, what sort of race pays under a grand the winner
quambone ... its out coonamble way lol ... the poor buggers couldn't even get on the t@b for a win bet
horse was bred by arrowfield (they had the mare themselves too and sold her a year later for $30k) ...
was sold at the january magic millions sale for $300,000 ffs ...
just a big game for the breeder's & selling agents ...
i saw RNSW messara said he was going to look into the court case verdict
might pay all of o'sheas costs ... bail him out ... out of goodwill
ps just joking
you blokes obviously have'nt had much to do with legal cases it seems.
o'shea knowingly ommitted a material fact for personal gain. No way he wins on appeal.
o'shea represented himself as "knowing " the horses condition and the purchasers relied on this. SHOULD they have relied on it? irrelevant.
I think its a fantastic decision for owners who are not in the 'closed shop " run by major breeders as their personal playground.
The result will probably be that intending purchasers be told at point of sale that they have the option to get an independent opinion in much the same way as home buyers get a building inspection.
Those giving the opinions will insure themselves via professional indemnity.
o'shea knowingly ommitted a material fact for personal gain. No way he wins on appeal.
o'shea represented himself as "knowing " the horses condition and the purchasers relied on this. SHOULD they have relied on it? irrelevant.
I think its a fantastic decision for owners who are not in the 'closed shop " run by major breeders as their personal playground.
The result will probably be that intending purchasers be told at point of sale that they have the option to get an independent opinion in much the same way as home buyers get a building inspection.
Those giving the opinions will insure themselves via professional indemnity.
Scoose me mrbean, I represented meself in a parking fine infringement in Broadmeadows court and won. 100% strike rate for monday.
Anyway O'Shea would win an appeal, picking the right judge and your home.
MM- give o shea a call then since your so adept in court.You can represent him in the appeal.
vets will be happy - any trainers / syndicators / breeders etc that are asked to comment on the overall condition of a horse will have to say talk to the vet OR just release the vet report to the potential buyer which would be a sensible approach anyway
look out the next vet that gets one wrong
look out the next vet that gets one wrong
spot on womble - that's why it is an interesting saga
overall - can of worms officially open
bit harsh on monday mike maybe MrB
MM- give o shea a call then since your so adept in court.You can represent him in the appeal
when considering that the judge who made the ruling on the original case didn't seem to see the simplicity of the legal argument for the complainant - and actually ruled IN FAVOUR of o'shea
so perhaps mike has a point in there somewhere ... and the legal system is convoluted ... and not so straight forward ... and maybe will just depend on who his worship is at the time
me ... i'll let the legal argument go whichever way ... but it is still a very interesting situation as i see it ... for all participants in this horse selling business (incl the breeder presenting for auction a horse with a vet problem, to the seller happy to take commission on a horse with a vet problem, to the owner who just goes along with whatever the seller tells them)
******
so i wonder now ... why does the breeder not have to provide a vet certificate ... when presenting a horse for auction ... or is it all purely caveat emptor
and if that argument does not hold ... then surely some responsibility (20% 30% 50% etc) must be on the owner to seek their own vet exam ... (maybe an oshea appeal gets the costs reduced to $250k - equally shared)
****
and ... can i buy a $300k bungalow somewhere ... ask the seller if it is ok ... the seller has a report that says ... dry rot might be an issue but at the moment the house has nothing wrong with it, it is a good house ... and i buy it on the sellers chit chat saying its ok
if i find later that the house seller was aware of a potential dry rot problem ... can i back sue them for the cost of the house plus expenses ? maybe i can who knows !
overall - can of worms officially open
bit harsh on monday mike maybe MrB
MM- give o shea a call then since your so adept in court.You can represent him in the appeal
when considering that the judge who made the ruling on the original case didn't seem to see the simplicity of the legal argument for the complainant - and actually ruled IN FAVOUR of o'shea
so perhaps mike has a point in there somewhere ... and the legal system is convoluted ... and not so straight forward ... and maybe will just depend on who his worship is at the time
me ... i'll let the legal argument go whichever way ... but it is still a very interesting situation as i see it ... for all participants in this horse selling business (incl the breeder presenting for auction a horse with a vet problem, to the seller happy to take commission on a horse with a vet problem, to the owner who just goes along with whatever the seller tells them)
******
so i wonder now ... why does the breeder not have to provide a vet certificate ... when presenting a horse for auction ... or is it all purely caveat emptor
and if that argument does not hold ... then surely some responsibility (20% 30% 50% etc) must be on the owner to seek their own vet exam ... (maybe an oshea appeal gets the costs reduced to $250k - equally shared)
****
and ... can i buy a $300k bungalow somewhere ... ask the seller if it is ok ... the seller has a report that says ... dry rot might be an issue but at the moment the house has nothing wrong with it, it is a good house ... and i buy it on the sellers chit chat saying its ok
if i find later that the house seller was aware of a potential dry rot problem ... can i back sue them for the cost of the house plus expenses ? maybe i can who knows !
TB..This is the crux of the Industry...I'll tell you this story...A Horse just sold recently at the Sydney sales ..a yearling..A new buyer or fairly new buyer to the industry bought the Horse....They have a marketing strategy of breaking their Horses in early and giving them a Training foundation that will set the Horse up physically for the future...They claim that every Horse they purchase has been thoroughly Vet checked and looked over by their so called experts....The Horse did bring a large sum of money.
I know that one of the joints has been injected to get it through the sale....This Horse will never race..This needs to be looked at imo....fkn stinks.
I know that one of the joints has been injected to get it through the sale....This Horse will never race..This needs to be looked at imo....fkn stinks.
My point is the Breeder walks away scott free....But with a simple blood test ...which they don't do at sales...Would have revealed all...again the Industry only protects or try's to protect it's own....fk the buyers and the punters.
absolutly spot on Lazza!
industry is run over by the vested interests of the major players.Especially the breeders.
industry is run over by the vested interests of the major players.Especially the breeders.
and good luck getting a vet that will allow one that has played up in the barriers and backed out for inspection to reload and take place in the race. Same can of worms imo
'' you said horse was Ok, then it broke down/ pulled up lame??.... pay here please''
'' you said horse was Ok, then it broke down/ pulled up lame??.... pay here please''
BENEFIT NIGHT........ PLEASE can't beleive people can fall into this one............ THEN you have these fools on TVN promoting it............ WAKE UP YOU FOOL's. It's was PROVEN that he robbed some1, NOW they want to have a BENEFIT NIGHT, heard it all now.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539