Owner gets impounded launch back on appeal

Press, Volume CXVI, Issue 34107, 20 March 1976, Page 1

Owner gets impounded launch back on appeal

A Customs-impounded $300,000 luxury’ launch has been returned to its Nelson owner after an appeal to the Governor-General (Sir Denis Blundell) to waive forfeiture of the vessel.

The 65ft vessel Tarquin was seized in February after its owner, Mr R. H. Pot ton, pleaded guilty in the Wellington; Magistrate’s Court to an offence against the Customs Act. Mr Potton had imported' duty-free the hull, deck, built-in tanks and superstructure last year, then illegally fitted it. out as a luxury launch instead of using it in the manufacture of moulds~for glass-fibre boats. The Assistant Controller lof Customs (Mr J. J. John- ■ son) said yesterday in Wellington that Mr Potton was ! within his rights in applying for waiver of the forfeiture ■ of the goods seized. He hadto appeal within three, months of the seizure. Mr Johnson said that I charges against Mr Potton; were assessed on those por-; tions of the vessel affected I under the Customs Act.

| “In this case, it amounts Ito a partial restitution of the goods impounded by i substituting a substantial sum of money in lieu of restitution.” Mr Johnson said. “The law has operated in !the normal manner, and I i would take strong exceptior Ito any suggestion that this I -was otherwise.”

s i He said the part restitu--’f' tion was “substantial.” but A)would not reveal its amount. 1 ; However, it is believed to be 1.-close to six figures. n! During the February court I hearing, the Collector of n; Customs fixed the value of islthe goods under the act at '591,647.

At that hearing, a Cus- ! itoms Department solicitor , I said that charges arose after Mr Potton failed to use I the Halmatic yacht I -r the manufacture of moulds In its completed condition it could not be used for that purpose without major L modifications. At the hearing. Mr Potton’s solicitor (Mr A. D.

i Holland) said the duty-free ; import application had been made with the intention of j building boats. But the ! fishing industry had become less popular, and Mr Potton I had decided it would not be I feasible to build boats of ' that size. j He said the boat had been completed as a pleasure craft and used as a demonstration model. It was essen1 tially for Mr Potton's' personal use, but was also • substantially a business (asset. j Mr Potton was fined $lOOO j ion each charge after pleading guilty of intent to de- | fraud and a breach of the Trade and Industry Act, 11956. I Ply lite Marine Ltd, of ! which he is a director and I principal shareholder, admitted two like charges and was fined $5OO on each. ■ The return of the vessel !to Mr Potton was announced yesterday by the Collector of Customs in Nelson (Mr C. M. McLaren)