There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 55 comments are related to the topic:
Chris Cook on Dan Skelton case
Chris Cook on Dan Skelton case
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 55
|
By:
The man is about as trustworthy as Boris Johnson.
|
|
By:
Skelton fell fowl of two areas of the BHA's regulation. One for the original offence (27) and the second for the attempted "cover up" (28). Here are the passages from the Sarah Crowthers independent panels report showing the scope of punishment for each:
27. My attention has been drawn to the fact that the sanctions in place at the time of commission of the breach of the Trainers’ Code of Conduct provided an alternative of financial penalty or suspension or withdrawal of licence. The range of fine was £1,000 to £10,000 and the suspension range was 1 month to 3 years. Penalty entry point is £2,000 or 3 months’ suspension. 28. In respect of the breach of (J)24 the financial penalty range is £1,000 to £5,000 and the suspension range is 1 month to 3 years. Entry point is £2,000 fine or 3 months’ suspension.[/i] Remember Dan Skelton admitted to both breaches yet he barely got a fine higher than the combined entry points. You can read the report in full on the BHA's website. As Sarah Crowther states at the end "I am satisfied that a fine of £6,000 reflects the circumstances of the case and meets the needs of justice and is in accordance with the penalty guidance" Absolutely laughable state of affairs. Why did the BHA agree to a £6k fine and on what basis? |
|
By:
in the end the size of the fine with no suspension is exactly what the BHA did not want..people and the media talking about it.
what an organisation to run what was once a great sport |
|
By:
Just about everything they touch becomes embroiled in controversy.
|
|
By:
The meaning of"langer"is"illegal or dishonest dealer"..very prescient to name the horse after dodgy Dan .
|
|
By:
Methinks the ''plaintiff'' was satisfied with his ''out of court settlement'', and to sign a confidentially agreement !
Essentially, The B H A are satisfied that Skelton has been honourable at the eleventh hour ! The £6k fine is a ''token'' gesture by the B H A, who would of obviously been advised by senior lawyers of the ramifications of a higher fine, and more pertinently a lengthy suspension ! |
|
By:
LoyalHoncho18 Mar 24 18:26Joined: 28 May 10 | Topic/replies: 14,098 | Blogger: LoyalHoncho's blog
The man is about as trustworthy as Boris Johnson. I think thats most unfair on Boris!! |
|
By:
I thought Webber and Sherwood were very lucky years ago. Skelton's case shows very little has changed over the years, buyer beware.
|
|
By:
Why agree to an out of court settlement ? If they felt so wronged why not go the whole way and take him to court ? Sorry no sympathy from me.
|
|
By:
If you were taking someone to court and were offered a good deal,and your legal team advised accepting it. Refusing could be a very expensive mistake.
|
|
By:
GLASGOWCALLING, good morning.
That's the point Sir, the plaintiff accepted Skeltons money over, perhaps a monetary ( sic ) / suspension. |
|
By:
Essentially, The B H A are satisfied that Skelton has been honourable at the eleventh hour
So, unless the matter had been reported and investigated he'd likely still be doing it and "honourably" coming clean if challenged later!? A £6K fine to an accused fraudster who;s just won maybe ten times that at Cheltenham and can afford to pay it and the private settlement. Fantastic administration by the Bungling Horseracing Association. In fact it is akin to being told to carry on regardless! |
|
By:
B.H.A. Please feel free to continue accusing minor trainers of not trying with their 150/1 shots.
 That's about your dead strength. |
|
By:
Glasgow...do you have no idea how much persuing a high court case would cost when a KC will charge 2 or 3k per hour..easy to go bust with those kind of costs
|
|
By:
Glasgow, an "out of court settlement" simply means that a case was brought, a writ served, a defence filed and (one assumes) the matter was listed for preliminary hearings before the court for directions and orders from the court. At some stage, PRIOR to the case actually being listed for a trial of the issue, a negotiated agreement was reached which satisfied both parties. Indeed Halcyon, it is very likely that DS paid damages but we will never know. The High Court has no power whatsoever to "discipline" DS. Only the BHA and Disciplinary Panel can do that. Which they did, albeit somewhat leniently.
|
|
By:
The Civil case and BHA's agreement to £6K fine are two seperate things. Like is said above the fine is barely higher than the entry point for both offences (combined) which beggars belief. Why did they agree to this and why to the Independent panel chair also seem of the opinion that justice is served. What are they seeing that the rest of us aren't? BHA not fit for purpose.
|