TWO CHARGED.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 103, 2 May 1936, Page 12

TWO CHARGED.

DEBT COLLECTING.

DIRECTOR AND MANAGER.

THEFT ALLEGATIONS DENIED. Allegations of theft made by the police were denied by Percy Eraser Hodgson, managing director of the Dominion Mercantile Agency, and Frederick William Packer, manager of the firm's Auckland branch," when they were jointly charged, on summons, before Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., in the Police Court yesterday on .30 counts alleging fraudulent omission to account for or pay part of money received. The hearing, which opened yesterday morning, was adjourned late in the afternoon until Monday afternoon.

Senior Detective S. G. Hall conducted the case for the police, assisted by Detective J. B. Finlay, and' Mr. Spencer R. Mason appeared for the defendants. Evidence heard after the main edition of the "Star" went to press yesterday follows:—

A number of witnesses, whose firms had placed accounts in the hands of the Dominion Mercantile Agency for collection, gave evidence that they had been overcharged sums of f>/.

Cross-exami ncu by Mr. Mason, the witnesses said that tliey were satisfied with the explanation that the 5/ was to cover ofliee expenses and expenses incurred in making inquiries. They Were also satisfied with the integrity of the firm and Mr. Packer, the local manager. One accountant said that Packer had invited him to examine the system of accounting.

Mr. Mason said it would be admitted that in each case there was a difference of 5/ between the amount paid to the Court and the amount charged to the client, under the heading of "Court costs re ... ." "I wish to make it quite clear that wo are only admitting the 'difference,' and that I will advance an explanation alxmt this at a later stage in the proceedings," said counsel.

Solicitor's Evidence. A qualified solicitor, Reginald Charles Jerrold Sanderson, manager of Accounts, Limited, Auckland, said lie was employed as the solicitor of the Dominion Mercantile Agency, Limited, between June, 1033, and January 22, 10.10. Witness produced a letter which Packer showed him in January, 1034. The letter was signed by Hodgson and addressed to Packer, and said, inter alia: "I note that summons fees are sj:ill giving you some concern, and that you liavo lost a client through that charge. It is lietter to lose one or two clients than a few hundred pounds a year by cutting out such charges. We simply cannot afford to do it."

Witness said ho discussed the contents of the letter with Packer. Witness, after hearing Packer's explanation of the charges, told him that if statements were sent out stating that certain costs had been paid into Court which had, in fact, not been made, then the matter was just plain theft. Packer told him that clients did not know about the charge, and that it was definitely a "try-on." Packer said the gradual fallingrofl of revenue was caused by employees telling clients of the concealed charge. "Packer also told me that the chargcs Worried him considerably, and that ho could not sleep at night,'' added witness. "Because Packer had considered „that a uniform summons fee of 5/ was 'too hot,' an amended scale had been introduced—3/ to be charged when the amount sued for was £.'} or less, and 5/ for ail amount over £3."

Another Letter Read. Sanderson produced a second letter written by Hodgson to Packer, dated April 20, 1034, which was as follows: — "I anticipate that this year Wellington will show a net profit of at least £800, so you will have to go hard to keep xip. You\always give me the impression that you are afraid to charge your clients, consequently you do not make as much in proportion to the business handled as you should do. Wellington showed a return of £.'i2(i for 1-180 legal processes issued; at the same rate you should have shown a return for the year of £435, nearly £300 more than your actual figures."

With Sanderson still in the witness box, the hearing was adjourned until 2.15 on Monday afternoon.