Case Against Rental Car Hirers Fails

Chronicle (Levin), 11 April 1949, Page 4

Case Against Rental Car Hirers Fails

Two charges of Breaches of the regplations pertaining to rental la'is, preferred against Alfred drtnur. Jqhn 5u?nsiey» and twq 3harges ' pf aseigtipg- in such oregches against Mgurice" 'Robert Welby.' were 4jsmisse?i j>V Mr- A- M: Godlding,' S.M., in ''the/Magistfate>S' pourt, Levin, "on Friday. Barnsley wgs ' charge'd tiiatj "being the ' hire'r of a rental car, he allowed "it to be driven by a person other than himself wi'lhout* the" permission of the licensee and, secondly, "with sup-r plying false information: Weljay was charged with assistmg in these breaches. Mr. J. P. Bertram ,'appearg^i fqr Barnsley an4 "Mh MThomson' "for"Wejby. Cpndueting tlie case for the poli'ce, Acting-Sergearit * V. G. Arnpld callecj Keith. Stewart Dawson, " fbreman-mechanic at J. G. Milne's "garage. Dawson told the court that on Thursday, ' March 17, Welby" had apprbaGhed him and as^ed to iqire a car. He had refuse'd because he knew defendant to be under 21 years qf age. The follpwing morning Wel^y had retu'rped %ith Bariisjey and he (witness) ji^-4 prepared ' 0- rental car hire forni for the latter, who had signed it. Welby had also signed in tBe s'pace for the driver's signature. Barnsley ha4 said he had a driver's license, but . did , not Baye it wi«-B him. jJpon bejng askefj the number of the Ijcence, witness had been given' No. 139. Which- of the two had supplied this pupiber he could not say. As far as Be knew, Barns^y was the iiirer of the car ahd had signe'd "as the driver, although he had thpught Welby would driyie the vehicle." Crpes-examihed by Mr. Thpmspn, witness said that once Barnsley had signed the form, he gnd hi's flrm were protected. He atlniitteb that he ha'd a "fair idea" that Welby would drive the car. " Con'stable A. T. Kelk said that on March '21 he "had interviewed Welby, who had said that, wishing to hire a rental car and not being over 21 years of age, he had persuaded Barnsley to sign the form for "him. He had paid the £5 deposit and had driven the car away. Barnsley, when interyjewed, _ h°d said that Welby had asked him to sign the form-. He (Barnsley) did not have a driver's licence and. had not been asked for it. Cross-examined by Mr. Thomson, Constable Kelk said that Welby's licence was No. 139. Mr. Thomson then submitted that the case was ill-found'ed. 1 There had been no crime in what the parties had done and there was nothing illegal in a person under. 21 driving' a rental car. The only oifence cfluftl have been that. pf the hirer in allowing Welby to drive withput the permission of the licensee of the vehicle. It was a case where the actual contract bore Welby's signathrSu^> 'the' -driver. Dawson"haci asked for the licence number and had got Welby's. Examining the documents, Mr. Goulding remarked that the speciinfeit' signkttireU supppsed to ,be those of Barnsley and Welby, looked "remarkably : like one and the same handwriting." However, it was not easy tcr be sure of such .things. He would have to dismies the case because at was quite clear that Dawson knew Welby was going to drive the vehicle.