Your answer must not exceed 1,500 words. Your answer should be written professionally (please ensure spelling, grammar, and punctuation are correct) and be structured logically.

Question: Jim Peters wishes to purchase a dairy farm for $12 million. He has a deposit of $1 million. He seeks funding of $11 million from AXS Bank Co Ltd for his purchase. AXS Bank Co Ltd requires Jim to transfer title to the farm to the bank until he has paid off the loan with agreed interest. Jim agrees to this proposal. In due course, the bank became the registered proprietor of the farm under the Land Transfer Act 2017. Because of a drop in dairy prices Jim fell behind in his repayments to ASX Bank Co Ltd. Mike Douglas, manager of the branch of ASX Bank Co Ltd at which Jim maintained his account, initiated a sale of the farm after following all statutory notice requirements. The sale was widely advertised in the media in the local area but not on national media outlets for farm sales. At the sale, the price agreed to be paid by the purchaser of the farm was lower than the market value of dairy farms in the area at that time. The proceeds of the sale satisfied Jim's liability to the ASX Bank Co Ltd, but Jim received only $500,000 from the sale. The market value for farms in the area suggested John should have received $1,000,000. ASX Bank Co Ltd received a letter from Jim's lawyer, Mary McAllister, complaining that ASX Bank Co Ltd had caused Jim to lose much of his equity in the farm. You work at the Head Office of ASX Bank Co Ltd. The file disclosing the circumstances above has landed on your desk. You are asked to advise ASX Bank Co Ltd what it should do. Write a report addressed to your manager, containing your advice which should discuss the likely outcome if the matter were to proceed to court and practical suggestions for how the bank might best manage the complaint.

Reading for this assignment: Applefields Ltd v Damesh Holdings Ltd [2001] 2 NZLR 586 (CA) (available to you on Nuku on the Assessments Page for COML 309) - Please note that though the relevant statute law in this case has been repealed, the content of the relevant provision is identical to the relevant provision in the Property Law Act 2007; Chapter 11 of Tyree's Banking Law in New Zealand (3rd ed); and Part 3 of the Property Law Act 2007