Thorn Song confusion furthers Zayat intrigue

[Antitrust32]

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?

A bank doesnt cut the check, and insurance company does. And we require necropsy reports (like autopsy for horses) to pay out any mortality claims.

[prudery]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

A bank doesnt cut the check, and insurance company does. And we require necropsy reports (like autopsy for horses) to pay out any mortality claims.

While it is correct that the insurance company cuts a check on an insured horse, they can not receive a necropsy on a live horse ...

But they can pay out a mortality check on a live one ..

Confused ??? Not so much ...

Think of a badly damaged horse where euthasia MAY be indicated ...

The horse is considered a TOTAL---like a totalled car --whether it is euthanised or not...

The insurance company thus can pay out on the total loss--so even though the check shows a mortality, the horse MAY be alive, but a total loss ...

Just like the insurance company appropriates a totalled car, they may do this with a totalled horse, and chose to proceed further with its " salvage " or not ...

This was done with Your Host by Lloyd's of London ... Lloyd's took over the rehab and ownership of the horse, after a bad accident that produced multiple fractures, and he recovered to stand at stud and give us Kelso ..

In a sense it was done with Cigar--who was a total loss as far as breeding worth ...

[philcski]

Originally Posted by prudery

While it is correct that the insurance company cuts a check on an insured horse, they can not receive a necropsy on a live horse ...

But they can pay out a mortality check on a live one ..

Confused ??? Not so much ...

Think of a badly damaged horse where euthasia MAY be indicated ...

The horse is considered a TOTAL---like a totalled car --whether it is euthanised or not...

The insurance company thus can pay out on the total loss--so even though the check shows a mortality, the horse MAY be alive, but a total loss ...

Just like the insurance company appropriates a totalled car, they may do this with a totalled horse, and chose to proceed further with its " salvage " or not ...

This was done with Your Host by Lloyd's of London ... Lloyd's took over the rehab and ownership of the horse, after a bad accident that produced multiple fractures, and he recovered to stand at stud and give us Kelso ..

In a sense it was done with Cigar--who was a total loss as far as breeding worth ...

Ummm, while your analysis is (relatively) correct, you are trying to school someone who actually does this for a living...

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by philcski

Ummm, while your analysis is (relatively) correct, you are trying to school someone who actually does this for a living...

No she was incorrect about paying Mortality on a live horse. Just not possible. Mortality claim is for a dead horse. But there are other ways to be paid a claim.

[freddymo]

You have to buy coverage for LOU (3.75% rate here).

Is that high? You have gelding (Mine That Bird) worth 1.5 and you only have to pay 60k a year to insure him against him being basically useless? If you insure (lou) him at a 1.5mil evaluation and he can only run in quarter claimers do you get paid?

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by freddymo

You have to buy coverage for LOU (3.75% rate here).

Is that high? You have gelding (Mine That Bird) worth 1.5 and you only have to pay 60k a year to insure him against him being basically useless? If you insure (lou) him at a 1.5mil evaluation and he can only run in quarter claimers do you get paid?

We do not offer LOU to Race horses. That would basically put us or any insurance company out of business.

And we also limit LOU coverage to $500,000 or less. So say you have a show jumper worth $900,000 we can do the jumper for mortality at a discounted 3.5% rate on the 900K (or $31,500 premium) and do LOU on the jumper for $500,000 on the horse at 3.75% (18,750 premium) plus probably $375 for our $10k Major Medical..

Total premium for said jumper would be $50,625.

[Antitrust32]

Let me add that I have absolutely no idea what actually transpired with Thorn Songs claim as it was a different company that paid out and they could have different policies.

I'm just explaining our policies incorrectly.

[prudery]

Originally Posted by philcski

Ummm, while your analysis is (relatively) correct, you are trying to school someone who actually does this for a living...

Not trying to school anyone Phil--see above--that is what the check for Thorn Song said ....

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by prudery

While it is correct that the insurance company cuts a check on an insured horse, they can not receive a necropsy on a live horse ...

But they can pay out a mortality check on a live one ..

Confused ??? Not so much ...

Think of a badly damaged horse where euthasia MAY be indicated ...

The horse is considered a TOTAL---like a totalled car --whether it is euthanised or not...

The insurance company thus can pay out on the total loss--so even though the check shows a mortality, the horse MAY be alive, but a total loss ...

Just like the insurance company appropriates a totalled car, they may do this with a totalled horse, and chose to proceed further with its " salvage " or not ...

This was done with Your Host by Lloyd's of London ... Lloyd's took over the rehab and ownership of the horse, after a bad accident that produced multiple fractures, and he recovered to stand at stud and give us Kelso ..

In a sense it was done with Cigar--who was a total loss as far as breeding worth ...

i remember reading about 'your host'. he fractured a shoulder. they packed sand around him to support him while he lay in the stall. always had a significant limp, but didn't hinder him covering mares.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by prudery

While it is correct that the insurance company cuts a check on an insured horse, they can not receive a necropsy on a live horse ...

But they can pay out a mortality check on a live one ..

Confused ??? Not so much ...

Think of a badly damaged horse where euthasia MAY be indicated ...

The horse is considered a TOTAL---like a totalled car --whether it is euthanised or not...

The insurance company thus can pay out on the total loss--so even though the check shows a mortality, the horse MAY be alive, but a total loss ...

Just like the insurance company appropriates a totalled car, they may do this with a totalled horse, and chose to proceed further with its " salvage " or not ...

This was done with Your Host by Lloyd's of London ... Lloyd's took over the rehab and ownership of the horse, after a bad accident that produced multiple fractures, and he recovered to stand at stud and give us Kelso ..

In a sense it was done with Cigar--who was a total loss as far as breeding worth ...

I work for an Equine Insurance company.

We can not, will not, and never have paid a mortality claim on a horse that is alive. We REQUIRE necropsy reports on dead horses to be able to pay a claim. (this was proved to not be true)

Check out my post above that discussed Loss Of Use, or Stallion Accident, Sickness & Disease.

it is 100% different than a mortality claim. Loss of Use claims do happen, we pay out about 75% of the horses value and we get ownership of the horse. or you have the option of getting a lower amount and keeping the horse. My company does NOT offer LOU to race horses. Also, you dont automatically get a LOU payment if your horses loses its use. You have to buy coverage for LOU (3.75% rate here).

Cigar and War Emblem fall under AS&D. Insureds can purchase AS&D for Stallions and if they fail in the breeding shed (like dont have live sperm like Cigar and War Emblem at first), then they can get a claim paid.

I think you are a little confused about the word mortality. It is impossible to pay a mortality claim on a live horse. Thorn Song obviously had AS&D or LOU or a fraud situation occured. (this sentence was also proved not to be true)

[prudery]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I work for the largest Equine Insurance company in the world.

We can not, will not, and never have paid a mortality claim on a horse that is alive. We REQUIRE necropsy reports on dead horses to be able to pay a claim.

Check out my post above that discussed Loss Of Use, or Stallion Accident, Sickness & Disease.

it is 100% different than a mortality claim. Loss of Use claims do happen, we pay out about 75% of the horses value and we get ownership of the horse. or you have the option of getting a lower amount and keeping the horse. My company does NOT offer LOU to race horses. Also, you dont automatically get a LOU payment if your horses loses its use. You have to buy coverage for LOU (3.75% rate here).

Cigar and War Emblem fall under AS&D. Insureds can purchase AS&D for Stallions and if they fail in the breeding shed (like dont have live sperm like Cigar and War Emblem at first), then they can get a claim paid.

I think you are a little confused about the word mortality. It is impossible to pay a mortality claim on a live horse. Thorn Song obviously had AS&D or LOU or a fraud situation occured.

No I am not confused NOR do I not comprehend that it does logically seem impossible to pay a mortality check on a live horse ...

BUT--I viewed the actual check as per KY.com and it does indeed say MORTALITY claim on Thorn Song ( less deduction ) ...

So THEY called it as such, paid out as such, and though I am not in the biz, I assume that is how they did it considering that the horse was a total ...

And they knew the horse was not dead---see for yourself ...

When I said check in my original post, I meant THAT particular check--not all mortality checks of course ..

I do ubnderstand LOU, and I do understand what mortality means ..

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by prudery

No I am not confused NOR do I not comprehend that it does logically seem impossible to pay a mortality check on a live horse ...

BUT--I viewed the actual check as per KY.com and it does indeed say MORTALITY claim on Thorn Song ( less deduction ) ...

So THEY called it as such, paid out as such, and though I am not in the biz, I assume that is how they did it considering that the horse was a total ...

And they knew the horse was not dead---see for yourself ...

When I said check in my original post, I meant THAT particular check--not all mortality checks of course ..

I do ubnderstand LOU, and I do understand what mortality means ..

That would not happen with my company, We dont pay mortality on horses that are alive. We must see a necropsy. Euthanasia must been recommended by a Company Approved Vet, etc. We also dont offer LOU on race horses.

maybe the check was written as mortality and wasnt paid as mortality. Also, why is Zayats check posted on a website?? that makes no sense and I dont think I'd believe it even if I saw it.. I just went to ky.com and it was for KY Jelly.

[prudery]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

well whoever paid a mortality check on an alive horse should be fired.

That would not happen with my company, and it could be the reason we are the biggest in the world. We dont pay mortality on horses that are alive. We must see a necropsy. Euthanasia must been recommended by a Company Approved Vet, etc. We also dont offer LOU on race horses.

Seems like whoever paid this check are idiots or the check was written as mortality and wasnt paid as mortality. Also, why is Zayats check posted on a website?? that makes no sense and I dont think I'd believe it even if I saw it.. I just went to ky.com and it was for KY Jelly.

Ky Jelly---that is hilarious ...

The website I put up is wrong--I will get you the link so you can see ...

It also says " final payment " on it ...

You may not know me, but I am adverse to putting up shiat, and here you get drilled --and maybe rightly so--for posting what may not evcen be shiat--so I wasn't talking out of the wrong end ...

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by prudery

Ky Jelly---that is hilarious ...

The website I put up is wrong--I will get you the link so you can see ...

It also says " final payment " on it ...

You may not know me, but I am adverse to putting up shiat, and here you get drilled --and maybe rightly so--for posting what may not evcen be shiat--so I wasn't talking out of the wrong end ...

I found the check you dont have to post it and you are right it does say mortality. I really have no idea why the check is on a website though.

And you were not posting shiat.. If companies want to pay out mortality claims on horses that are alive.. more power to them!