Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PatCummings
This entire story is stupid four ways from Sunday.
The bank cuts an insurance check on a horse who didn't die.
The owner, presumably...right, cashes an insurance check on a horse that isn't dead.
Someone, somewhere has this horse, alive...right???
Cashing an insurance check on a live horse, sent to you because he is presumed dead...is, in my opinion, an exercise in fraud, no? If that ISN'T fraud, what is? If you absolutely, wholeheartedly, cashed this check, knowing the horse isn't dead...
Now, the bank is just as stupid for not confirming the horse is dead. A phone call from a vet would do the trick - banks call firms to confirm funds available all the time - can't make this call?
Either way - ridiculous.
Is Thorn Song really dead?
|
according to the article, the check was correctly written/cashed. the insurance decided to pay due to the condition the horse was in. zayat isn't in trouble (presumably) on that score. since they paid, and the horse is alive, they now own the horse. i'd guess it's similar to the payout on war emblem, who is still covering mares.
zayat isn't under fire over receiving the check-it's just that 5/3 thinks they have the rights to all his horses, therefore they felt they should've gotten the check. i don't even know that the real issue is zayat-it sounds to me that the real issue is that the bank is about to fail, and they're seeking every avenue to generate cash.