STOCK AGENTS SUED

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 718, 18 July 1929, Page 10

STOCK AGENTS SUED

FARMER ALLEGES BAD ADVICE £125 DAMAGES CLAIMED (From. Our Oven Correspondent J HAMILTON, Today. A claim that will have wide influence on stock-dealing: in future commenced in the Supreme Court today, when a sheep-farmer of Manawanui Vaslian Humes Wheeler, sued the Farmers' Co-op. Auctioneering Company. Ltd., stock agents, Hamilton, for £125 damages for loss of stock allegedly due to faulty advice given by a servant of the defendant company. Plaintiff was represented by Mr. 11. T. Gillies and the defendant company byMr. W. P. Gray. The statement of claim sets out that on December 30, 1925, J. Gerrand, stock agent, and a servant of the defendant, was asked by the plaintiff to put a reasonable selling price on a line of lambs belonging to plaintiff. Gerrand priced the pick _of the lambs at 15s each. Belying upon the skill and judgment of Gerrand the plaintiff authorised the defendant to sell the lambs at the price mentioned. . On January 6, 1929. plaintiff sold 000 of the lambs to a buyer introduced by defendant for 15s each. It was part of the trade of the defendant to advise the principals as to the price to be put on all classes of live stock, and defendant company held itself out as reasonably competent to do so. Plaintiff held, however, that lambs were at the time of the sale worth £ 1 each, as defendant well knew or should have known. Plaintiff further submitted that a® a result of the defendant’s want of care, skill and diligence, reasonably necessary for the due performance of the agency, plaintiff lost 5s a head on each of the 500 lambs. Therefore, he claimed from defendant £125. The defence admits that Gerrand interviewed the plaintiff and that plaintiff authorised him to sell 500 lambs at 15s each to a buyer Introduced by defendant. The company denies, however. that Gerrand counselled plaintiff to dispose of the lambs at this price. If Gerrand did so as a servant of the defendant company, then he acted beyond tlie scope of his authority and engagement. He had no authority from the defendant company to price the pick of lambs, and it was not within the scope of the duties of defendant (in the capacity in which lie was employed to act) to price or express any opinion concerning the value of plaintiff’s stock. Mr. Gillies said that Wheeler was a young Englishman, who had been a farmer all his life. In December, Gerrand, the defendant company’s agent, called on him and inspected a line of store iambs. Wheeler said lie did not know the price at that time. Gerrand told him they were worth 14s, but later advised him to try and dispose of them at 15s. Subsequently Gerrand brought out one Loughlin, another employee of the company, who bought the lambs, which w ere sold a few days later at the Frankton sale yard to a well-known stock buyer, D. j. Bryant. Mr. Gray: That is not correct. The buyer was the Sunny Downs Estate. Mr. Gillies: In which Mr. Bryant has a big interest. Mr. Gillies went on to say that the iambs w-ere then sold by Bryant for a total of £545 19s 6d, which, after expenses of droving and commission were paid, left liim a net profit of £ll4 10s 6d. All AVheeler received was £394 9s 6d. Mr. Gillies said that unfortunately he was unable to proceed on the grounds of fraud. There were certainly suspicious circumstances in the case. Wheeler thought Loughlin was the buyer and bad no idea that Brvant had purchased the lambs. Mr. Gray: Does Mr. Gillies still suggest wrongful dealing now- lie knows the true buyer was the Sunny Downs Estate? Mr. Gillies said that any agent who priced lambs at the time at 15s each must necessarily have been negligent. His Honour: You charge defendant with negligence in giving his opinion? Mr. Gillies: Yes. An agent acts for the vendor, who looks to the agents to see he gets a proper price. Plaintiff, Vashan J. Wheeler, bore out counsel’s statement. He said that when Loughlin was brought out no reference was made to the fact that he was a servant of the company. It was not until a fortnight later that he learned, through neighbours, tiiat Bryant was the purchaser. (Proceeding.)