Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 3 · column 6 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
The situation was compli- 9 cated, the hearing officer re-fi ported, because “in the _ meantime Jenkins had lost his sales receipts which were the^ only record of sales of Cross- m man’s property. Although he'* kept a ledger record of sales of his own goods,” the report states, “Jenkins’ only records of sales of Crossman’s goods consisted of sales receipts kept in a ci-tdl gar box on his desk.” •((
Mr. Archer’s report concludes that Mr. Jenkins’ failure.’ >h to pay Ms. Crossman was due to-A his difficulty in selling some of.’V the items; his plan to finish selling everything before settling with Ms. Crossman; his “neg-'A ligent and inadequate recordkeeping, resulting in the loss of'A his only records of the sales;,A (and) his refusal... to pay a settlement amount, and . . . his de-i •* mand upon her that she proved! the value of the goods.” „•>
The “conclusions of law” reached by Mr. Archer found that Mr. Jenkins was in violation '1 of the Auctioneers Board regula-' ‘ tions by his refusal to pay Ms. Crossman; by his discarding,''1 without first contacting Ms.” • Crossman, small items which he was unable to sell; and by refus-’ ’ ing to reach a settlement without 1 proof offered by Ms. Crossman of • the value of the items by ap- 1 praisal. <• *
“However, there are mitigat- ‘ ing circumstances,” Mr. Arche/' notes in the conclusions. “Jenkins’ failure to pay was not an effort to defraud Crossman of her money or property. Rather, his^;> failure resulted from his selfish-,, interest in selling his own goods^ his negligent record-keeping.,, with regard to Crossman’s goods, and his waiting for Cross--,, man to make a demand for the,« fair value that Jenkins ought to have paid her on his own initiative.”
►jj
The final note contained in' * Mr. Archer’s report asserts that, “Although Jenkins, the expert „.•] did propose to pay her a fair va-. n lue (without specifying a dollar amount) if she proved a value,:n that is not an acceptable substw;c
. i
(See JENKINS, p. 18) (A
84.7%