BUILDER PROSECUTED

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 81, 6 April 1933, Page 9

BUILDER PROSECUTED

ERECTION OF A HOUSE

CASE AT LOWER HUTT .

"There is'no stability in the whol* thing. . . In the "event of any strong gale or earth movement it is liable to collapse. . . It is the very worst jol» I've ever seen," stated Mr. J. Fletcher, chief building inspector o£ the Lower Hutfc Borough Council, in the Lower Hutfc Magistrate's Court jesterday, in describing a lioubc in Rossiter Ayyiiue. A builder, William Ullrich, was charge! by the inspector with, erecting a building with the "roof not properly framed and strutted, with the plates-not scaifed or nlved, •wi.th.the studs not squarely and uly cut 'to WtigHiilsr'intb*checks in the plates, and "with defective concrete in the foundations. All the charges related to the house in,Rossitcr Avenue described by the inspector. Ullrich did not appear, nor was he represented by counsel. t • The borough, solicitor, Sir. C. R. Barrett, said that prior to November last Ullrich, had'been building in the Hutfc county. In - November he applied for * permit for a building in Rossiter Avenue. Air. Fletcher warned him that he would, have to comply strictly -with the Lower, Hutt building bylaws. Requisitions and warnings with, respect to defects had been, issued to him' since January, but he had made no.- Substantial attempt to remedy, the defects and had proceeded 'with the erection of the house, making it much, more difficult'now to'comply with tha bylaws. This was a very serious case, and the Borough Council desired full publicity for it asa warning to others against "jerry-building." The council had power to demolish the house, and proposed to do so if Ullrich did not comply with tha requisitions in a reasonable time. Evidence was given by Joseph Fletcher* who said that Ullrich told him that as tha building was for himself, he' thought ha could dp as he liked with it. Mr. Fletcher detailed, with exhibits, so.me of the de« fects in the construction of the house. Mr J. G. L. Hewitt, S.M., convicted Ullrich, but deferred, imposing a penalty in order to give him an opportunity of complying with the council's requisitions. His Worship indicated that if Ullrich did not comply the penalty would be severe.