INSURANCE ON CARS.

Auckland Star, Volume LVIII, Issue 225, 23 September 1927, Page 9

INSURANCE ON CARS.

*t cqmtajff JUDGE STRINGER The sequel to the losa by lire of an Armstrong Siddeley motor car on the road over Mount Messenger, Taranaki, in May laet 3 was heard at the Supreme Court to-day, when a claim by the owner, Misa Evelyn Mulliner, was heard against the North British and. Mercantile Insurance Co. The company, who were represented by_ Mr. , Finlay, defended the. claim. , . ■ ... , -,'"'■■,! Mr. Singer, for plain tin", said the car was purchased from local agents in February, 1925, for £465, and its 'first owner spent between £50 and £fiO in additions and improvements. In July, 1920, it was bought by Mr. J. L. Scott, who took out a policy with -the i defendant company. In the following September, ? Mr. Scott sold taeV car to plaintiff, who was a friend, living with them, and a transfer of the policy was effected. In May last Mr. and Mia. Scott went for a tour ur the car. Whilst the.car was going orer Mount Messenger the clutch slipped and Mr. Scott, who was driving, got out to make repairs. The car went over a slight bank, caught fire and was. burned. The insurance company had refused to pay on the ground of breache* of the conditions of the policy. ;' .. j. >* -

Mr. Finlay asked for a nonsuit on the ground that there were at least two niisstatementa of fact in the insurance proposal. One wa» a statement by Mr. Scott that he. had never had a previous accident with a car, but it had been. admitted that he had had an accident of a;very similar type with a Ford sedan. . -

Mr. Singer said this was not denied. The first car was not insured. As a matter of fact the agent of the insurance, company was aware of the first accident and he had pressed for the policy on the Armstrong Siddeley to be taken out. The suggestion, that there was anything suspicious about the circumstances under which the car caught fire was strongly resented.

Judge Stringer refused to grant - a nonsuit, sayihg -that the question of the policy regarding previous accidents referred to accidents followed by a claim on an insurance company.

Mr. Finlay's other point, namely, that the price stated by Scott to have been paid for the car was incorrect, was also ruled out as the basis for a nonsuit.

His Honor gave judgment for plaintiff for £%75. He said he would put

his reasons for his ruling with regard to the policy questions into writing. His reason for doing so would be to give the Court of Appeal (if the case was taken there), an opportunity bf expressing an opinion as to the morality of certain clauses of insurance- policies which were to his mind a series tf traps. He would be very plcascdfif the case was taken further.