Winner disqualified after 'ignorant' jockey rode on day he was supposed to be banned

A horse has been disqualified from a victory because its jockey was supposed to be serving a suspension.

Shane Fenelon, who is based in Ireland, travelled to Newton Abbot on September 9 to ride a horse for trainers Peter and Michael Bowen in a bumper race. Under the 7lb claimer the horse, Alan De Banks, won the National Hunt Flat Race by a length at odds of 11-8.

But it subsequently emerged that Fenelon should not have been allowed to ride the horse because he should have been serving a two day whip ban, issued in Ireland after a race in August.

Fenelon appeared before a BHA independent disciplinary panel on Monday charged with the offence of riding while suspended as an overseas jockey.

READ MORE:

READ MORE:

The hearing was told that one of the Bowens had contacted BHA customer services on the day to check if Fenelon was able to take the mount, as the jockey was unsure, and was told it was fine, according to

But it emerged the jockey had signed a declaration form stating, “I confirm I am not subject to any suspension on this day.” Fenelon said he had signed without reading it while he was weighing out.

The panel found Fenelon in breach of the rules and issued the jockey with a five day suspension while Alan De Banks was disqualified and the victory awarded to The Expensive One.

The chair, James O'Mahony, said: "Ignorance of the rules is not an excuse. A jockey has a personal responsibility to make sure he is eligible.

"He had every opportunity of seeking accurate information as to what the position was. We find it hard to conclude that he didn't, somewhere in his outlook, suspect or know that if he was banned in one jurisdiction, he would very likely be banned in another."

He said the BHA customer services operator did not have all of the facts relating to Fenelon.

"The question was not, this jockey has been banned in Ireland, what's our position?,” he went on. “It was simply referring to a jockey being unsure as to whether he was banned.

"It was an oral statement of what an employee at the BHA thought was the answer to a very brief telephone inquiry.

“She had no access to the details of the Irish ban and there's no clear evidence that she had authority to make a concession. It was not in writing or followed up or substantiated, even by email."