SIGNED CONTRACT

Taranaki Daily News, 10 April 1935, Page 2

SIGNED CONTRACT

NEW PLYMOUTH WOMAN’S ERROR. JUDGMENT GIVEN AGAINST HER. A misunderstanding over the length of time covered by an advertising contract led to a claim for £3 2s 6d by W. J. Crawford, Palmerston North, against Mrs. Agnes Clarke, New Plymouth, in the Magistrate’s Court at New Plymouth yesterday. Mr. W. H. Woodward, S.M., gave judgment for Crawford and pointed out that although Mrs. Clarke had genuinely thought her contract was for a week only she had definitely signed for a year. Mr. C. H. Croker appeared for Crawford and Mr. L. M. Moss for Mrs. Clarke.

He did not propose to take any evidence other than that taken at Palmerston North, said Mr. Croker. Crawford was an advertising agent who through his agent had canvassed Mrs. Clarke for an advertisement for a picture programme series at a New Plymouth theatre. A contract for a space had been indubitably signed by Mrs. Clarke for a year’s advertising. She said the contract had been for one month only, but there was the evidence of the contract form

signed. Mr. Moss said the claim was small but important from Mrs. Clarke’s point of view. The traveller had called when she was busy, and she told him she was opposed to advertising. He was persistent and to get rid of him she took a space for a week and offered to pay then and there. She did not know the advertising was continuing until she received a bill for 10s lOd, whereupon she wrote saying she had advertised for one week only and sent 2s 6d. She had not seen a contract form and it was alleged there had been misrepresentation. Miss Naomi Sturmey, who was in Mrs. Clarke’s shop when the agent went out, said she heard Mrs. Clarke say to him, “Mind you, that is for one week only.” Whether the man heard it or not she did not know. Mrs. Clarke gave evidence along the lines of what Mr. Moss had said. No period above a month was mentioned and the agent had shown her nothing but sample advertisements. She signed on a small piece of paper on which was no other writing. She did not see a copy of the contract till the solicitors obtained one recently.

She signed a piece of white paper on which there was little room to sign, Mrs. Clarke told Mr. Croker. She did not sign a piece of yellow paper such aS produced with her apparent signature on it. The agent could not htlve doubted that she wanted one week’s advertising only as she had tendered 2s 6d. Mrs. Florence Maud Harrison, employed by Mrs. Clarke, said she heard Mrs. Clarke impress upon the agent that she wanted only one week's advertising. She heard him say “all right." Dorothy May McKoy, another employee, gave similar evidence to that of other Witnesses. He was sure Mrs. Clarke did not intend to contract for more than one week’s advertising, said Mr. Woodward, although she had signed a year’s contract. She denied signing the yellow paper, however, and the question was should she be bound by the terms of the contract? If she had Signed as the result of misrepresentation she was not bound, but she must be held to her agreement if she had signed in mistake. That was the question to be decided. He could not be sure whether the agent had heard Mrs. Clarke say she believed the contract was for one weOk only. There could be no exception in this case to the rule that one was bound by what one signed Mrs. Clarke had had the benefit of six months’ advertising and he felt sure, said Mr. Woodward, the experience would be worth a good deal to her.