HIRE PURCHASE SYSTEM.

Timaru Herald, Volume XCVIII, 19 May 1925, Page 7

HIRE PURCHASE SYSTEM.

CHARGE OF THEFT.

By —.Y>.-ocs Association.

CHRISTCHURCH, May 18. Transactions with a sewing-machine, which she had obtained. under a hire purchase agreement, led to the appearance of Margaret Bpttersby, a cook, on charges of theft of the machine, and false pretences, in that sl;e obtained a, sum of money by representing that the machine belonged to her. She was acquitted. COMMENT BY JUDGE ADAMS. CHRISTCHURCH, May 18. A by-product of the credit system, which, though it is the , subject of sharp controversy amongst jurists, is a common instrument adopted in tVansaetJ'ons With purchasers who t find “terms” preferable to outright buying, was strongly commented upon bv Mr Justice Adam's, when a ease involving

the transactions of a client with a sewing-machine firm regarding a machine purchased on a “hire purchase” agreement, canto' before him at the Supreme Court.

The transactions, it was alleged for the defence, had been made by the client on the iirtcierstamlirig that the machine was here, whereas, the terms stipulated that, until the purchase price was fully paid it belonged to the company.

One of counsel engaged stated that tile client was under the impression that the. machine was on the same basis as anv article obtained on credit, which became the property of the purchaser, w-'n’o W"S Hah l " for thp artioulit, and not for the article itSclf. His Honour, addressing the jury, remarked that a salesmen who had rdvon evidence had not shown that he himself fullv understood the agreement, and it for the jury to decide whether the client in these circumstances could be held responsible.. After! going iiite the law on tho stinieeh of sueli .agreements, the fni-m of which ho mentioned had been decided . iff 1895. His Honour remarked : “Ore fools constrained to say in a, ease of this kind that when firms are dealing with poor people, more m- less ignorant, it is incumbent on those persons selling 'on those terms to sop if the persons with whom tJifv are dealing understand the terms, arid not to take signatiiros without first seeing that thev understand elearl" dint the.proppvtv of which they .are taking possession is not their rironertv. bid ’-pinnins the property of the seder until a. certain time.” “It mav be ri rt”est«oii for the Legislature to consider ” he concluded. “whether members of the public ithable to protect themselves through want of education or opportunity ought not to be protected bh law.’