END OF MORATORIUM.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18843, 18 October 1924, Page 12

END OF MORATORIUM.

AGREEMENT REACHED.

MORE AMENDMENTS MADE.

WHEN MORTGAGEE MAY - ACT. COURT ORDERS NOT RESTRICTED. i I [BY TELEGRAPH. —SPECIAL REPORTER.] ~ .WELLINGTON. Friday. The third attempt has succeeded and .p. complete agreement has been reached between the two Houses of Parliament on the disputed clauses in the Mortgages Final Extension Bill. The report of the managers was presented to the House of Representatives this afternoon by the Speaker, after which the Minister for Customs, Hon. W. Downie Stewart, explained the nature of the compromise reached.' • ' -Nrf The Minister said the managers had elaborated clause 9 of the bill so that it had expanded from four to nine sections. The main feature was this: The House had agreed to fix March 31 as nominally the date up to which mortgagors were protected. After that they' were entitled to three months' notice before the mortgagee could exercise his powers. Other provisions were repeated in reference to the fact that once a man put in his notice, he was protected until the Court had adjudicated upon it. After an extension has been made, nothing could be done until the period' of extension had expired. After March 31, a mortgagee must give three months' notice before exercising any of his powers. This carried it at least to June 30. Mr. Wilford: That is provided ' the notice is given on March 31 ? Enforcing Covenants. Mr. 'Downie Stewart: Yes, but that is not likely. Another clause incorporated with modifications some provisions of the Property. Law Act.. There had been no substantial modification of what had been agreed to by the House. Previously there had been restraint of all powers of the mortgagee up to March 31. This had been modified because it had been pointed out that while he would not be able to call up his money or exercise his power of sale, there were some covenants in most mortgages which, especially ill the case of farming land, the mortgagor ought to be compelled to observe. These were covenants such as those compelling the mortgagor to destroy rabbits and similarly preserve the property. There should be still power for the mortgagee, by leave of the Court, to compel the' mortgagor to observe these covenants. • . * Conditions of Orders, Another modification was that whereas previously it had been stipulated that even where leave had been granted to a mortgagee to exercise his powers under the mortgage, he could not so exercise them for three months, just as if he had not applied. It had been pointed out to the conference that once application had been made to the Court and it had adjudicated, it would lay down conditions and do all that was necessary for the protection of the mortgagor. It had been for the House to see that the power of sale was not exercised save in very speoial circumstances until March 31, and that after March , 31 they should not be exercised without three months' notice. '

The Leader of the Opposition, Mr. T. M. Wilford, said he would like to . conEratulate the managers on the result they ad achieved. He was especially pleased to see that on an intricate bill like this it had been possible to .reach; an agreement; The compromise was not quite satisfactory to his side of the House, but after all it had been a compromise which meant a mutual giving way. It - was very satisfactory to find that an acceptable agreement .had been made with the Council. '

In answer to a question by the Hon. D. Buddo (Kaiapoi) as to what the action of the Court would be if a man were unhelpable, ' Mr. : Stewart said that if a man could satisfy the Court that if he were given reasonable time to pay he would do so, the Court would meet him. The clause in the bill regarding that question was a wide one. The report "of the. managers was accepted and transmitted to the Legislative Council. " - *>■ Discussion iu . Council. "When the Legislative Council was asked this afternoon to agree to the report the Hon. 0. Samuel expressed the opinion that the bill as it went to the Council from the House was better than the final arrangement. As the bill now, stood it was simply a measure to establish a close season for defaulting mortgagors, a season which could not , end before March 31. : >/;'< .. Sir Francis Bell: If we accepted the bill as it came from the House it would have been a close season, till July 31. Mr. Samuel said that in this unfortunate agreement it was not lawful for the mortgagee to sell in any circumstances. For the first time the mortgagee was deprived of all rights, whereas previously he Court had power to grant an order for immediate sale.

Sir Francis Boll: I tpideratajid the Statutes Revision Committee was prepared to agree to March 31 instead of December 31.

Mr. Samuel: Yes. Sir Francis Bell: That is what we have' done. .V'--Mr. Samuel: We have done mora than that.

Sir Francis Bell said that it had . not been suggested that the provisions of the, Property Law Act would be repealed. The point of the removal of the power of the Court during the short period referred to he regarded as an absolute matter of \ indifference. The extension now given was practically immaterial. He did not like the amended bill, but that was different from saying that they would have all or nothing. The ; latter was an. attitude which the Council could not properly take up and would resent if the House adopted it. The Council was there to meet the House if it could, and iruhis opinion the managers were entitled to arrive at the compromise which they made. The report was agreed to.