INSURANCE CLAIM.

Taranaki Daily News, 1 June 1922, Page 6

INSURANCE CLAIM.

LOSS OF MOTOR CAR. COMPANY DISPUTES LIABILITY. A claim to recover insurance moneys in respect of a motor car destroyed by fire was heard by Mr. Justice Reed in the Supreme Court at New Plymouth yesterday. Plaintiff was Norman Burke, of Palmerston North, stock buyer, and i his claim was for £4OO from the Stand--1 ard Fire and Marine Insurance Comi pany, with whom the policy on the j car had been taken out. Mr. C. A. [ Loughnan (Palmerston North) appeared : for plaintiff and Mr. R. H. Quißiam i represented the company. - i It was elicited that Burke was abi sent from his district at the time the ; car was destroyed. He had left it in j the care of his brother, H. Burke, and |it was being driven by the latter en I route from Woodville to Palmerston '.North on the evening of April 10, 1921, when it took fire. Mr. Loughnan remarked that the destruction of the car 1 and the amount of the loss were admitted. The defence relied on two issues: Firstly that the action was not brought within the specified time of three months after the claim had been rejected, and secondly that there had been a breach of the condition that the car was not to be used for business purposes. He contended that as the defences were affirmative the other side should open the case. The case for the defence was accordingly begun first. Evidence was given by Joseph Clifford Bradley, accountant, Wellington, and formerly insurance adjuster. He said that on behalf or the Standard Company he had inquired into the loss of Burke’s car in April of last year. In the course of his investigations he interviewed Henry Burke, plaintiff’s brother, who generally had custody of the car. The latter gave particulars of the circumstances of the fire, stating that flames were first noticed coming through the footboards. It was very windy at the time, and as there were no appliances about the fire had to be left to burn out.

The witness was proceeding to give evidence as to statements he had obtained regarding the purposes for which the car had been used, but an objection was raised by Mr. Loughnan, and His Honor ruled the evidence inadmissible. The case for the defence was then closed. Reviewing the case for the plaintiff, Mr. Loughnan said that one ground of defence having fallen through, the defendant would have to rely on the highly technical point that the action was not brought within the required time. It was true that the company, by a letter on May 10, rejected the claim, but counsel pointed, out that this letter did not stand alone. A long series of correspondence followed, resulting in further rejection. The last letter of this correspondence was dated August 27, 1921. The letter of May 10 had been written without reference to plaintiff. If the letter had to be taken then without any further qualification there "would have been one of two things for Burke to do. namely, either to abandon the claim, or to have immediately brought his potion. He did not bring his action, but employed a firm of solicitors to take up the matter for him. The tenor of the correspondence from that time forward was what was relied upon as taking away the condition as to the bringing of the action within three months from May 10, 1921. Counsel contended that throughout the correspondence the defendant company, by asking for further evidence, and by representations which they had made, held out tq plaintiff a reasonable expectation that they had still suspended judgment. He maintained that their decision in May was premature, in that they had given plaintiff no opportunity of being heard. In reply, Mr. Quilliam dealt with the question of whether the limitation of time had been wavered. He urged that no hopes of an amicable settlement were held out by the company, and that there was nothing to lead any reasonable man to believe the company intended paying. There was nothing improper or sinister in their action; they had merely satisfied themselves that the assured had no claim. His Honor said he would take time to consider his decision.