REPAIRS TO DRAINS

Evening Post, Volume CXXXVI, Issue 67, 16 September 1943, Page 7

REPAIRS TO DRAINS

WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY?

A clause in the works committee's report that a request from the Wellington Master Plumbers' Union for the council to accept liability for that portion of a private sewer which lies in the public street be not acceded to was discussed at the meeting of the City Council last night. Where a main burst, said Councillor R. A. Wright, he had never heard of anybody but the council being responsible. . , ,«■ T-. The Deputy Mayor, Councillor M. F. Luckie, said that blockages of private drains did not result from blockage of the main drain. Invariably they were between the junctions and the house. The City Engineer, Mr. K. E. Luke, said that the city did not maintain private drains from their junction with the main to their terminals at the houses. ~ . Councillor R. McKeen said that where there was a blockage on the main drain it was the council's obligation to repair it. In a case he knew of a widow, the street had to be picked up. Where there was a breakage of the main the council should undertake repairs. What was the interpretation of a private sewer? asked Councillor FurCouncillor Luckie said that the lawwas that the drain was private until it reached the main drain of the street. The council had never accepted the liability for the work. Councillor R. L. Macalister spoke of his experience in acting for private citizens in regard to drains under the road, in which cases owners were told that the drains must be taken up at the expense of the private owner, to find out.the cause. He thought that when such a blockage occurred the (private owners should get the city to do the work of opening up- the drain i and determine the cause of the blockage, the owner to be present and the person liable, whether city or private owner, should be responsible .for the cost. He thought it was wrong for the private owner to have to bear the cost in the first case. It was wrong that the owner should spend money and then fight the corporation to see who paid. The matter was referred back to the works committee for further consideration.