HIRE OF CAR.

Manawatu Standard, Volume L, Issue 119, 16 April 1930, Page 9

HIRE OF CAR.

MOTOR FIRM RESPONSIBLE. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, April 16. That a motor-hiring firm must supply a car in a condition satisfactory, tor the journey to be undertaken was the decision of Mr E. Page, S.M., in a case involving some points of interest to motorists, heard in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday. C. Biirnard sued Wellington Rental Cars, Ltd., for £4B 10s, being the amount of hire paid in advance, in addition to running costs and personal expenses incurred, owing to the alleged failure of the car to complete the journey for which it had been hired. It was admitted that the car had been hired for 28 days, for a trip to North Auckland, the hire, £22, being paid in advance. Plaintiff stated that there was a slight noise in the back axle when he took the car over, but it became : steadily worse, and the crown wheel and driving pinion had to be renewed at Taupo, occasioning a delay of three days. Further trouble was experienced between Taupo and Rotorua, and plaintiff decided that it would be impossible to carry on. During the time the car was on the road, he had seventeen punctures and blowouts, due to the alleged unsatisfactory condition of the tyres. Defendant counter-claimed for £4 5s 6d for damage alleged to have been done to tyres and to a wheel. It was contended that the trouble in the back axle was due.to bad driving by the plaintiff, and that plaintiff had failed to keep the tyres properly inflated, thus causing the punctures. , In giving judgment for the plaintiff for £45 with costs, the Magistrate said that the evidence of witnesses for both sides showed that some of the tyres supplied were old and worn. Plaintiff had produced two tubes which were in the car when it was supplied to him, and defendant’s witnesses admitted that these were typical of those remaining in the car. He was satisfied that the tubes produced were not in a satisfactory condition for a journey to North Auckland, and that some of the tyres supplied were old and defective. ... ~ The Magistrate said he was satisfied also that the defendants had made no proper inspection of the car before handing it over to the plaintiff, and that the condition of the back axle was substantially as stated by the plaintiff. Mr Burnard had been prevented from making a business trip, and had been put to certain expense and inconvenience. The counterclaim must fail.