What is the ruling when the owner and the rider dispute the nature of the contract (loan for use vs. lease) immediately following the contract?

Primary text

If the animal remains intact, and the dispute arises immediately after the contract, the statement of the rider prevails. This is because the presumption is the absence of a lease contract and the rider's financial exemption from it. Therefore, the rider takes an oath and returns the animal to its owner, treating it as a loan for use ('ariyah).