Retailers Criticise Court Decision

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31942, 20 March 1969, Page 1

Retailers Criticise Court Decision

It was adding insult to injury to suggest that the retailer must involve himself in expensive litigation to recover what was rightfully his, the executive officer of the Canterbury and Westland Retailers’ Association (Mr B. G. M. Brinson) said yesterday.

Mr Brinson was commenting on a remark by Mr H. J. Evans, S.M., in the Christchurch Magistrate’s Court on Monday. Mr Evans said, while sentencing a man to prison for false pretences involving 5549.84, that he was not convinced the firms concerned deserved to have the processes of the criminal law used in their aid. They could take civil action if they thought it worth while. Mr Binson said that the retailers were amazed by the Court’s decision not to order restitution.

“Instead of pointing the finger at the gullible retailer the Court would be well advised- to admonish the banks for their apparent willingness to grant cheque account facilities willy-nilly,” Mr Brinson said. “Retailers are far from gullible in accepting cheques from unknown customers and they are heartily sick of playing the role of office boys for the banks.

“The banks are projecting a modern image in their internal systems and in their extensive advertising, but not in the hours during which they are open for business. For three hours and a half a day, all day on bank holidays, and six hours on Fridays the retailer has to perform the function of a quasibanker, and pays heavily for

doing so,” Mr Brinson said. “The retailer is placed in a position many times a day where he is called upon to accept cheques in payment of goods or lose a sale and customer good will. “Banks are promoting cheque accounts more strongly than ever before and retailers would be the first to agree with the bank’s advertising that ‘anyone can open a cheque account,’” he said.