INSURANCE PREMIUMS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20482, 6 February 1930, Page 14

INSURANCE PREMIUMS.

BUSHMAN'S PAYMENTS.

MONEY RETAINED BY AGENT.

GUILTY ON THREE CHARGES.

An insurance agent, Thomas Leonard Williams, stood his trial before Mr. Justice Ilerdman and a jury in the Supreme Court yesterday on charges of converting to his use premiums totalling £37 collected on the insurance policy of John Baker, bush man, of Waiotira. Accused was defended by Mr. H. F. Guy, of Kaikohe.

John Baker said that he was working at Raukakatau, near Kaikohe, in 1925, when accused went to the bush camp saying lhat he was travelling- for the Temperance and General Insurance Company. Witness agreed to take up an endowment policy of £SOO and paid £9 5s as initial premium. Accused called on him a year later for the second year's premium, and witness took the opportunity of reminding him that he had received no policy. Accused said that the policy was in his house, which was burned down. One of the subsequent receipts was made out on a Colonial Mutual form, and when witness protested that ho thought ho had been insured with the Temperance and General Company, accused said that the two companies had amalgamated. When a policy was eventually sont in January, 1929, it was ono issued by the Colonial Mutual Company and was for £2OO instead of £SOO. Altogether, witness paid four yearly premiums, each of £9 ss.

In a statement to the police, accused said that about 1926 he wrote to tho Whangarci brancii of the Temperance and General Company asking for permission to act as its agent and retain a commission. At that time ho had accepted Baker's first premium and held it, pending receipt of an answer from Whangarei. No reply, however, was received. In 1928 he went into partnership with another agent, both doing business for the Colonial Mutual Life Company. He told Baker that he had joined this company, and did not say that it had amalgamated with the Temperance and General. Accused still held the first premium paid by Baker, who did not seem to be particular which company he joined as long as it was one. He therefore decided to give him a policy in the Colonial Mutual, and use the money to make future premium payments on Baker's behalf. He was now under the ■ impression that he had given Baker two recepits for one sum of money, and the final premium had actually been paid into the Colonial Mutual office, leaving £lB 10s which he was still holding in trust for Baker. • Counsel for accused said that the issue of a policy for £2OO instead of £SOO could be explained by the* fact that the premium for a 19-years-old policy-holder on a £SOO policy for life was identical with that on a £2OO policy maturing in 20 years. Similar policies had been taken out by Baker's relatives. Accused had been partly incapacitated by an accident, causing his business to drift for a tiiiie, and. he was something of a dipsomaniac. In summing up, His Honor said that it was dishonesty rather than muddling or drunkenness that accounted for lapses ranging over at least three years. The jury returned a verdict of guilty on the first three counts and not guilty on the fourth. Sentence was deferred.