PUNTER TO PAY BACK £72/10/

Greymouth Evening Star, 18 April 1938, Page 5

PUNTER TO PAY BACK £72/10/

NOTES GIVEN HIM IN ERROR. LONDON, March 1. Judge Hargreaves, at West London County Court gave a reserved judgment for the Betting Control Board, of Praed-street, Paddingion. in an action against Mr Robert Francis l Mount, of Oakley-street, Chelsea, for the return of .£72/10/-. paid to him in error at. the Ascot race meeting of Juno 16. 1936.

A counter-claim for the return of £B5. which Mr Mount handedt back to the Totalisator official, was dismissed.

Mr A. Watson, for the Betting Control Board, said that, on June 16, Mr Mount won £42/10/-. He went to the paying-out window, where a temporary clerk was arranging a pile of £5 notes, and put his hand through the window.

No felonious intent was suggested against Mr Mount, bitt his' actions flustered tlio clerk, who. instead of giving him his winnings in £1 notes, gave him 10 £5 notes, two £1 notes and a. 10/- note.

Mr Mount left the 10/- note. When the clerk realised' his mistake he went alter him, and l found him drinking champagne in the> refreshment room. Mr Mount returned to the control room andi said that if he had been overpaid he would 1 return the money. He turned' out his 1 pockets, and £B5 in £5 notes were identified and returned.

Mr Mount added that lie would again count his money, and if he found that; lie had been paid more than the £B5 he would return it. This he did not db.

Mi" Mount based his counter-claim on the ground that he had returne! the £B5 on an agreenient that the clerk concerned would not be dismissed. This, he said, was broken. Judge Hargreaves said that he had no doubt that Mr Mount. was> overpaid by mistake. In Hie ordinary way the rule that mistakes could not be rectified' after the punter had left the window was a, complete answer to the Board’s claim, but there was a clear intimation from M'r Mnuntj’s solicitor that if the Board' could 1 show that Mr Mount was overpaid he -would return the money and not rely on the rule, to escape liability.

The Board accepted! the challenge, and had proved that the money was overpaid, and so it seemed that Mr Mount, had waived his right to rely on the rule.

The judge added that he could not hold that there was any agreement that the clerk would not be dismissed.