by Kimberly Rinker, for Harness Horsemen International

Chicago, IL — The Ontario Harness Horse Association, a member of Harness Horsemen International, scored a victory on April 4, when an Ontario Racing Commission Panel upheld a May 2012 ruling that the OHHA was not responsible for paying C$100,000 to the ORC.

The ORC Director had asked for the C$100,000 as compensation for costs that arose from an investigation conducted by the ORC in 2004.

In 2004, the OHHA held a license as a Purse Accounts Manager, which had been issued by the ORC. From April through November of 2004, the ORC Director conducted a comprehensive, forensic audit, which involved retaining an accounting firm, and assessed the cost at C$100,000. During the time of the investigation, the ORC suspended the OHHA’s PAM license (during those same months in 2004).

In early 2005, the ORC Director and OHHA representatives met to discuss the C$100,000 payment and if the OHHA would apply for a 2005 PAM license. On Feb. 14, 2005, the ORC granted the OHHA their PAM license, as long as the OHHA agreed to pay the C$100,000. The OHHA refused and the PAM license was rescinded.

Further, the ORC Director had presented the OHHA with a trio of options in regards to payment of the C$100,000 and/or renewal of the PAM license. These were:

1. Renew the PAM license and pay the C$100,000
2. Challenge the ORC Director’s right to recover the C$100,000 investigatory costs and request a hearing
3. To not renew the PAM license, in which case the C$100,000 would not be payable.

On Sept. 11, 2011, the ORC Director again took the position (this time in a formal order) that the OHHA was still responsible for paying the C$100,000. The OHHA then asked the ORC Panel to review the order, and on May 31, 2012, the ORC Panel concluded that the OHHA was not obligated to pay the C$100,000.

In a formal statement, the ORC Panel admitted that the ORC Director had provided the OHHA with three options, and that the OHHA had chosen not to renew the PAM license, and therefore, was not required to pay the C$100,000. In essence, the ORC Panel stated that “the terms for the 2005 license were not consented to by the OHHA, which then ended the ORC claim for the charge of the C$100,000.”

The OHHA’s position had been that since they did not exercise a 2005 PAM license, they did not owe C$100,000 to the ORC; taking the third option provided to them by the ORC Director. The OHHA had chosen the option of non-renewal of the 2005 PAM license, which provided for the non-payment of the C$100,000.

The ORC Director challenged the ORC Panel’s May 2012 decision, and asked for a judicial review of the ruling. In a formal meeting on April 4, 2013, the ORC Panel upheld their original decision of May 2012, and forced the ORC to pay the OHHA’s legal fees represent, in the amount of C$13,500, within 30 days.