TRAINING OF HORSE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26748, 17 April 1948, Page 5

TRAINING OF HORSE

CLAIM AGAINST DECEASED ESTATE The arrangements that had been made for the training of the racehorse Putechan were in dispute when an action, brought by the trainer of the horse, James William Pankhurst, against the Public Trustee, as executor of the will of John Powell Simon, the deceased owner, concluded before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday. The plaintiff claimed £97 3s 2d for work done and material provided in connection with the training of the horse. Mr Bundle reserved his decision. Mr A. G. Neill appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr D. A. Solomon for the defendant. The case for the plaintiff was presented last month. The whole circumstances of the case were suspicious, said Mr Solomon. A comparison of an account sent to the Public Ti'Ustee with the statement of claim would show discrepancies. The real defence was that an arrangement was entered into between the plaintiff and the deceased in which the plaintiff was to train the horse after a certain date in return for half of all stake money. It was further alleged that the arrangement was arrived at because the deceased was dissatisfied with the horse’s failure to win any stakes up to that time, but the trainer was still hopeful. The account . rendered to the Public Trustee admitted half of the training fees, said J. M. O’Sullivan, estates clerk of the Public Trust Office. The figure was £47 8s Bd, but receipts had been produced to show that £3O of this amount had been paid. A search of all the deceased’s papers had failed to produce any evidence of accounts being rendered after August, 1946. Giving details of the items listed in the account as compared with those listed in the statement of claim, the witness said there were inconsistencies which cast suspicion on the plaintiff’s allegations. In an interview with the witness the plaintiff had stated that an arrangement had been made whereby he and the deceased shared the cost ,for the racng and training of the horse. The plaintiff had at no stage suggested that the arrangement had fallen through because the horse was not registered with the Racing Conference. A son of the deceased, Jack Simon, said he understood that the arrangement was for the plaintiff to train the horse free of charge. After his father’s death, the witness said, the plaintiff, when questioned, had maintained that the arrangement was on a basis of ” fifty-fifty on everything.” Harold James Simon corroborated his brother’s evidence concerning the plaintiff's statements to them concerning the arrangement. Reserving his decision, Mr Bundle said the court must view with " jealous suspicion a claim made against a deceased estate ”