CLAIM BY DIVERS Council, Pipeline Firm Defendants

Press, Issue 30997, 1 March 1966, Page 18

CLAIM BY DIVERS Council, Pipeline Firm Defendants

(New Zealand Press Association) GISBORNE, February 28. " A claim by a Cambridge diving contracting firm against the Gisborne City Council and Canterbury Pipelines arising from work done during the construction of the city’s sewer outfall opened in the Supreme Court today before Mr Justice Gresson.

New Zealand Diving Equipment, Ltd. (Mr R. R. Kearney), is seeking £3397 12s 2d from the council and Canterbury Pipelines, Ltd. (Mr R. de Goldi).

There is a counter-claim for £8195 for alleged breach of contract.

Dennis Penn Lascelles Twiss, aged 51, managing-director of the plaintiff company, said he first heard of the Gisborne scheme in 1960.

He saw the city engineer who outlined the proposal to him. It was suggested that Mr Twiss’s name be forwarded as a prospective sub-con-tractor- When the contract was let he received a letter from a consultant for Canterbury Pipelines whom he visited in Auckland. The witness said he understood the rates for the job concerned began when he arrived on the job and not when he went under the water. He came to Gisborne in September, 1964, and had discussions with representatives of Canterbury Pipelines. He said he could not give a contract price until he had seen the sea bedAt that time the defendants had no proposals as to how to entrench the pipeline. The witness put forward in general terms the most likely method of entrenching it. He said the difficulties would be encountered in the 1500 feet of “surf zone” near the shore. It was hard to get any details of the scheme. Soon after he returned to Gisborne and carried out a complete survey of the route of the pipeline and proposed anchorage area. He returned to Gisborne on October 14 and began diving on October 23. He received notification of acceptance of the terms he had set out in a letter of October 5. SUCTION MACHINE Between October 14 and November 30 he completed construction of a suction dredging machine. He demonstrated this machine on the beach and those present seemed pleased at its efficiency.

Twiss said that further divers were employed to

speed the job up at the request of the defendant In the outer area, the method of excavating was very successful. In the surf zone area the divers were a complete success but difficulties were experienced as the shoreline was neared. The last occasion he used his entrenching machine in the surf zone area was on February 3, 1965. After that the machine was left on the pipeline until heavy seas brought it to the surface and it was removed.

Considerable difficulty was experienced in obtaining payment for accounts rendered to the defendant, said Mr Twiss, and some accounts had not been paid. To pay his divers he had to use funds from his retail business and go in to overdraft at his bank. After the others left he continued diving for the company until February 19, 1965. OTHER DIVERS Subsequently other divers were employed to finish the work on the pipeline. The first he learned of a counter-claim from Canterbury Pipelines was on May

24, 1965. At no time had he said he could not finish the

Since leaving Gisborne he had been debited for hotel accommodation amounting to more than £lOO for which the defendant had not paid. Cross-examined by Mr de Goldi, Twiss said he had not charged for any work not done.

On November 17, 1964, the weather was too rough to dive. Replying to Mr de Goldi, he said he charged for 81 hours for two divers—more than £5O.

The charge for stand-by was £2 a man a day. Twiss said the rates for £3 Is 8d or £2 10s for divers did not apply to diving time only. He had no way of knowing how much stand-by work there would be. On November 30, witness said he had to dive to get a

siting. There was no diving on December 1, but he was under instructions from a representative of the defendant.

Twiss denied that up to December 29, he made frequent trips to refill drivers’ cylinders and that this time was charged for. Then the air compressor blew up on January 25. It was his responsibility to repair it, said Twiss. It was back in service on January 27. He read his diving charges for the days intervening and said there was a reason for those charges. The hearing will confine tomorrow.