WHO KNOWS THE RULES

[Locked in with pace]

When reading the positive tests on the fines it clearly states the amount of purse money that has to be returned.

1. Does the trainer have to return their 5%?
2. Do the 2nd through 5th place trainers get their 5% increased?
3. Does the winning driver have to return their 5%?
4. Do the drivers of the 2nd through 5th have their 5% increased?

[gh2009]

If the horse won the race, the owner would have to return the purse money, along with a forfeiture of the winning trainer and driver's 5%, plus a redistribution of the other ones you mentioned.

[carl baldwin]

Does the driver, trainer and groom have to give back any tip paid to them?

[gh2009]

The groom would still get paid for paddocking the horse. When you say "tip", do you mean their 5% share of the purse, if you do, yes, they have to give it back.

[rainman2]

The groom would still get paid for paddocking the horse. When you say "tip", do you mean their 5% share of the purse, if you do, yes, they have to give it back.

If the “tip” is outside of the purse money structure, I don’t believe the owner/trainer will be getting that money back. The owner/trainer might need a new groom (could be themselves) next time the horse races.  The word will probably get out very quickly if this occurred.

[The Exporter]

Everything gets reconfigured and distributed to the affected parties. Everyone but the gambler, that is. Tough shit, sucker. But, please get you wagers in for the pick 5...
 
 I have said for years, the tracks or the Racing Commissions should require every trainer that enterers a horse to have proper insurance. That insurance , in the form of a bond that would cover the losses of anyone directly affected by their malfeasance including the wagering public.
 It would clear-up a lot of this BS. 
For example; a trainer has 300 starts a year but no positive test that resulted in forfeiture of purse money, his cost for a surety bond would be quite low. But, in the case like
Dean Eckley, he would need to be cash bond as nobody would write him. That would get rid of him without any administrative or civil action to challenge. 
Or should we just continue to play this game that has been played from the first time a horse ever raced?

[Yonkers1A]

Everything gets reconfigured and distributed to the affected parties. Everyone but the gambler, that is. Tough shit, sucker. But, please get you wagers in for the pick 5...
 
 I have said for years, the tracks or the Racing Commissions should require every trainer that enterers a horse to have proper insurance. That insurance , in the form of a bond that would cover the losses of anyone directly affected by their malfeasance including the wagering public.
 It would clear-up a lot of this BS. 
For example; a trainer has 300 starts a year but no positive test that resulted in forfeiture of purse money, his cost for a surety bond would be quite low. But, in the case like
Dean Eckley, he would need to be cash bond as nobody would write him. That would get rid of him without any administrative or civil action to challenge. 
Or should we just continue to play this game that has been played from the first time a horse ever raced?

Spot on

[Kirbys Ace]

I thought ALL checks were held until the test results are released by the judges. So, if no money went out then no need to collect back.

[Locked in with pace]

Then why do they write on the penalties on the USTA that the purse monies must be returned?

[Horseshoe]

What about the better.
They also lost due to these cheating crooks.

[gh2009]

What about the better.
They also lost due to these cheating crooks.

Maybe they should make the bettors who won money on the race give it back too!

[Kirbys Ace]

Then why do they write on the penalties on the USTA that the purse monies must be returned?

Don't know. But I do know my check for 2nd place was held for 3 months while the 1st place winner was positive. And they appealed it. I fault to no avail about to at least releasing my second-place check then they can write me another if they lose the appeal! If they win the appeal, then we're square. No Luck. Finally, I got the 1st place check after about 4 months! Sucked because I could have used the money for Xmas. Maybe things have change?

[Late to the Paddock]

Then why do they write on the penalties on the USTA that the purse monies must be returned?

I read "purse monies must be returned" as a figure of speech. Can you imagine trying to get money back from some of these cretins?? And nearly every FAS report has a mention of someone bouncing a check.

[Locked in with pace]

You get an indefinite suspension if you don't return the purse money by a listed date after getting a positive for that race—I've seen it posted —and I've seen listed a reinstatement after you do return the money. How some stall paying the money back is when the ask for a stay. The money eventually HAS to be returned

[Kirbys Ace]

You get an indefinite suspension if you don't return the purse money by a listed date after getting a positive for that race—I've seen it posted —and I've seen listed a reinstatement after you do return the money. How some stall paying the money back is when the ask for a stay. The money eventually HAS to be returned

So now days they actually release the purse before test results are returned from lab?