DAMAGE TO FLAT

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26026, 1 February 1950, Page 8

DAMAGE TO FLAT

WOMAN AWARDED DAMAGES

*1 am afraid it is straining the credulity of the Court rather far for the defendant to suggest that the plaintiff should go around her own flat damaging everything. Whatever the truth of the matter is, I do not think it is that,” said Mr Rex. C. Abernethy, S.M., giving his judgment in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday on a claim for £62 5s made by Mary Mitchell against Clement Donald. Plaintiff was awarded the full amount of the claim, which consisted of £4l 5s for arrears of rent and £2l for repairs to the flat rented by Donald from plaintiff. Mr R. A. Young appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr J. K. Moloney for the defendant.

Mrs Mitchell said that she was the owner of a three-roomed flat at 336 Worcester street, which was rented to Donald in October, 1947, for £3 a week, and later £2 15s. Because of the defendant’s conduct and his refusal to pay „rent,. he was evicted on November 16.

Although the flat was in good order when defendant rented it, plaintiffi found after his eviction that it was in an "appalling state.” Blinds were cut, a mattress was slashed, and kapoc was spread over the floor of the bedroom and living-room. The floor of tlfe liv-ing-room was covered with fish and chips, a wall was pitted with what looked like knife marks, and the electric oven was a mess of fat.

Preston Thomas Battersby, a tenancy clerk to a land agent, said he had inspected the flat before and after the defendant’s tenancy, and was struck by the flat’s deterioration. He did not consider that the flat could have deteriorated so rapidly through normal wear and tear.

• The defendant denied responsibility for the flat’s condition, and alleged that Mrs Mitchell had done all the damage after he had moved.