MOTOR-CAR AND LAND.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18680, 9 April 1924, Page 12

MOTOR-CAR AND LAND.

STORY OF AN EXCHANGE. | UNAUTHORISED TRANSACTION.. BUYER OF SECTIONS MISLED. RETURN OF CAR ORDERED. An interesting story was disclosed in the Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., when Mrs. May Andrews (Mr. Dickson) brought an action against Erick Jansen, land agent (Mr. Tong), to lecover a motor-car, or, alternatively, its value, £200. The case arose from a transaction in sections lor which the motor-car was handed over to defendant as part payment. Plaintiff gave ev : donca that she advertised that sho would exchange her motorcar for some sections. Defendant answered the advertisement, and they went in tho car to seo some sections on the Eustou Estate. Defendant represented that two sections could be bought for £540. He represented that the owner of the sections was his uncle, who wis away; that the sections were a family concern; and that ho wanted tho car for the purpose of conveying prospective buyers to the estate. Tho car was valued at £200, which left £340 to be paid off by instalments. An agreement was made out. At defendant's suggestion, to keep down expenses, the motor-air was termed in the agreement as £40 deposit, and the purchase price of the sections £380, the balance of £340 to be paid by instalments. The agreement was signed. Continuing, plaintiff said she was very much surprised when tho vendor s solicitors made a demand for £10. Inquiries were immediately made from defendant s alleged uncle, Mr. J. S. Palmer, the owner of the sections. It was plained that Jansen was in no way related to .Mr. Palmer, who stated that he knew nothing about the car or the exchange, and that ha was selling tho sections for bC&J, ..n a £40 deposit, the balance on terms. M... Palmer agreed to the agreement- being cancelled in view of tho circumstances, and plaintiff delivered a letter to Jansen demanding the return of the car. Defendant told her he had paidl £90 to Mr Palmer, and that plaintiff was reallv the owner of tho sections. Questioned regarding tho car ho eventually admitted he had exchanged it for another car and £55. Plaintiff saw Mr. Palmer, who said that Jansen had not. paid him £90, and was merely acting as his agent in connection with the sals of the sections. . _. James Svdnev Palmer, of Remuera, in evidence, stated that defendant l<ad acted as his agent in tho matter, and that he knew nothing about any exchange in connection with tho sections; Jansen had no authority to effect an exchange, or to sell at a "higher price than £380. Tho first witness knew of it was when Mrs. Andrews complained to him. Witness had complained to Jansen that tho whole transaction was most irregular. To Mr. Tong -witness denied having sold the sections to Jansen or having given Jansen an option over them. The defence was that Sir. Palmer gave c"<fendant an option over the sections and defendant then sold them at a profit to Mrs. Andrews. Defendant gave evidence regarding the transactions. In cross-examination he admitted there was nothing in writing between himself and Mr. Palmer, and that he was not a registered land agent. Ho said he had been introduced to the sections by another land dealer. The magistrate said he was satisfied plaintiff had been misled. Mr. Hunt said he unhesitatingly accepted Mr. Palmer's evidence, as it was supported by correspondence, and that if defendant had been a registered land agent he would 1 hare advised steps being taken to cancel the license. The magistrate advised Jansen to go back to his previous occupation. The value of the car was . declared to be £200, and the magistrate ordered it to be returned within seven days. Plaintiff was awarded £15 16s costs.