COLLECTING DEBTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18388, 2 May 1923, Page 11

COLLECTING DEBTS.

PUBLICATION OF NAME.

PURSUANCE ; OF A THREAT.

'AItMEK / AWARDED DAMAGES

'BY TELEGQAI'FT. —OWN CORRESPONDENT.] MORRINSVILLE, Tuesday.

■A decision of interest, to the general public and the mercantile community was given by Mr. J. H. Salmon," S.M., in the Magistrate's Court, at Morrinsville, in an action wherein John Henry Bishop, of Morrinsville, farmer (Mr. E. McGregor), sought to recover £50 damages from Garnet Trevor Martin, of Auckland, secretary, trading as (he Associated Creditors' League (Mr. Martelli, of Auckland), for an alleged defamatory statement published in a printed circular on or about February 2 last. The alleged statement was as follows: "The Associated-Creditors' 'Legaue, as agents, offer the following judgments, notes, and account* for sale to the highest bidder: Bishop, J. H.,. Maungateparu, Morrinsville, drapery, £10 9s sd. • These accounts are guaranteed (by creditors) undisputed, correct, and just."

The judgment stated: The plaintiff, had purchased certain goods from a Morrinsville draper during the prevous year, and in December had given -two post-dated cheques, dated respectively December 21, 1922, and January 21, 1923, in settlement. These cheques were paid on due dates, and the plaintiff's account with the draper was therefore finally settled on January 22, 1923. On the same date the creditor wrote to the Associated Creditors' League advising them that the plaintiff's account had been settled, but the plaintiff's name appeared in the league's circular issued on February 2. r , %■■'■-. Defendant's System.

The system adopted by the defendant was admitted by the" parties. The league had subscribers among trading firms and shopkeepers in various parts of New Zealand, and it supplied these subscribers with a book of detachable printed forms, to be used for the purpose of collecting overdue accounts, and with instructions for .sending out these forms to the debtor in -a series and at certain intervals. The demands culminate in a threat of publication- of the debtor's account. in the circular referred to if payment is not made by a certain date. When this series of printed . (notices proves of no a.vail a printed form of notice is provided to be forwarded by. the creditor to the league containing particulars . 'the debtor's name, address and account. , A letter is then sent out to the debtor by the league containing, inter alia, the following passage: You are aware of our method of disposing of long-outstanding accounts. As agents we advertise them for sale in the debtor's district and elsewhere. Such publicity will have the effect of stopping further credit with all • traders /in any part of the Dominion, and we are naturally reluctant to take this ' step without first! "pointing • out' to you its certain result." -..vo-vA;':- :..■;..■--;.-

The next step is apparently the publication of the debtor's name and address with particulars of the nature of the account and the amount, in a printed cir" cular headed as follows: Accounts for sale. - The Associated Creditors' League, as agents, offer the following judgment notes and accounts for sale to the highest bidder, reserving the right to reject any or all of the bids." This circular :is

issued at intervals to the various subscribers of the league and includes the. names of debtors in various parts of New Zealand. ~'■> , v. ■'; ."■'.-,:;'/ ':.■'. -,'y : /.

Publication of the list on February 2, 1923, with the debtor's name therein was admitted by the defendant, and also that the plaintiff-had paid the debt befor© the date of publication of : the list. The defence relied entirely upon privilege. f/_ Defence of Privilege. ,

; The magistrate stated that : there was no doubt that the 'publication: of,: the plaintiff's name under the circumstances j was defamatory. The defence of privilege was available if the communication or publication was made by a person in the discharge of some public or private duty, whether legal or moral, or in the conduct of his own affairs in matters where his interest was concerned. The underlying principle was the common convenience and welfare of society, but not the convenience of individuals or the convenience of a class, but the general interest of society. i ■ .--,*'"* ' ' ",* . ■'• ' In* the case under review the publication, was made in pursuance of a threat—was, in.fact, the putting,into execution of that threat— was the ; culminating force of. the defendant's system of enforcing paymerit' of a debt. The defence relied principally upon the decision given" in two English cases dealing with trade protection societies and, after quoting at length from these cases, the magistrate pointed out that they ; were clearly distinguishable from this present case. In both,the English cases the alleged defamatory statements were made in response to inquiries as to the credit or financial position of the plaintiffs and the reply was furnished ..in one case by a firm who carried on the business of supplying such information for fee or reward, and in the other case the information was furnished through a bonafide' league of traders constituted by a number of traders for their own convenience or protection, and.. not conducted with a view to profit. In. the English case.* there was no publication in pursuance of a-'threat. . , No Apology Tendered. The ; plaintiff had written to the defendant demanding an apology for defamatory statements made, and also demanding £20 damages, but he. had received no reply j from the defendant. The defendant had, however, sent an undated typewritten circular out to the subscribers of the league stating that Bishop's accounts had been withdrawn from the list of accounts ■ for Stile. This circular contained name.« j in addition to that of the plaintiff, and there was no explanation that the plaintiff's name had heen wrongly inserted in the; original printed circular. Mr. Salmon held that the plaintiff was entitled to damages, and, in assessing these, he was entitled to take into consideration the fact that the defendant had never attempted to apologise or to explain that the plaintiff's name was wrongly included in the circular, and that it should j never have appeared therein. .Inclement was for th» plaintiff for the j sum of £25. with costs totalling £5 3s sd.