COST OF REPAIRS DISPUTED

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 27, 27 October 1926, Page 7

COST OF REPAIRS DISPUTED

A BUILDING CONTRACTOR’S CHARGES A claim arising out of the refusal of a resident of 8 Adelaide Road, Wellington, to pay the full amount asked for regarding certain repairs to her house on the ground that the charge was unreasonable, was made in the Magistrate's Court yesterday, when John Moffat, a building contractor, asked .Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M., to award him 'the sum of .£ll 18s. 9d. from Mrs. J. G. Hodge for time spent in repairing her propertv and certain extras. Mr. W. P. Shorland, who represented plaintiff, detailed the work done. “He charged 3s. 6d. per hour and no complaint as to the total amount was made until three months after the work had been completed," he said, in outlining the case. Mr, J. Hannah who appeared tor defendant, said that the time taken (66 hours) was altogether too long for such work. It was submitted that plaintiff ha dtold Mrs. Hodge that the work would take three days, whereas it had taken 66 hours. Counsel said it should have only taken four days to do the work with. extra jobs included. Plaintiff; however, had spun out the work to make it last longer. Mr. Hannah also stated that plaintiff should have charged unskilled rates as the work took so long. A witness for the defence admitted that a building contractor working alone sometimes received as much as 4s. per hour. - . , , The Magistrate stated that the weight of evidence showed that the price charged by plaintiff was somewhat high and he proposed to reduce it. Judgment would he given in favour of plaintiff for £9 instead of £ll 18* 9d. as asked for.