COMPENSATION CLAIM.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 15 September 1926, Page 4

COMPENSATION CLAIM.

ALLEGED PROPERTY DE-

PRECIATION.

DECISION RESERVED.

Furtlicr proceedings in the claim before the Assessment Court at Hawera in which Chas. Amon is claiming- £350 from - the Patea County Council _as compensation for alleged depreciation in the value of Ms property _as the result of excavation work carried out in the Ball Road, were taken this morning. Mr J. S. Barton, S.M., presided, and the assessors were Messrs F. Gawith and J. R. Corrigan. Claimant was represented by Mr P. O’Dea and Mr D. G. Smart appeared for .the defendant council.

Opening the case for the defence, Mr Smart submitted that the claim must be dismissed on the grounds that it had not been made within twelve months of the execution of the work. He stated that the road opposite claimant’s property had reached its full Width and level by October 14, 1924, whereas the claim had not been lodged until December 2, 1925. Counsel submitted ' secondly, that the claim must fail on the grounds that Amon was not the owner at law of the property at the time the alleged damage was done, and had taken over the property from the former owner with any disability which might, exist. George W. King, engineer to the Patea County Council, stated in evidence he had been in charge of the excavation and deepening of the road mentioned in the claim. In order to allow traffic to proceed the excavation work had to be undertaken in two parts, and the first portion completed was that on the opposite side of the road from claimant’s property. Up till August 12, 1924, claimant had access to the garage, but by September 9it was isolated. By October 14 the road was in its present condition so far as any effect on access to claimant’s property was concerned. Claimant had made additions to his house after the excavation had been completed. It had previously been a “lean to,” and the additions had practically trebled its value. \ Cross-examined by 'Mr O’Dea, witness said. that when the road work was being carried, out he had not interviewed th 6 Amon concerning the effect on the property, but the chairman of the eounty council had done so. The chairman had subsequently intimated that the Anions did not seem to know what they wanted. Provision was made for the, excavation of 200 yards on claimant’s behalf, but as no agreement. was reached the work was not carried out. On another property on the. road the sum of £SO was paid to the ower in respect of land, taken in connection with the road alteration.

Pereival Palmer, farmer, Ball Road, Alton, the original owner of the land in question, said that six years ago C Amon had asked if he cohid buildi a house on'Witness’ property. Witness had given Amon the permission requested, but no mention of the purchase of the land by Amon had then been made. In .Tune, 1922, Amon commenced working for witness. Three months later witness Had told Amon that lie could have the land rent free for five years, conditionally that he kept the paddock free of gorse for that time. Amon remained with witness as a share-milker Up till May, 1925. In March of that year Amon had intimated he would bo leaving at the end of the season and wished to arrange to purchase the section. Witness then had an idea of leasing the section. Amon next- mentioned his possible purchase in October, 1925. An agreement for the sale, and purchase of the section was drawn up on December 1, 1925, the consideration being £4O. In April or May of that year, Amon had made certain additions to the house whieh would previously have been described as a “lean-to.”

Cross-examined by Mr G’Dea, witness denied that he had diseussed the purchase of the section when he first gave Amon permission to build. He admitted that in March', .1925, the matter had been discussed, but had not reached finality, as the deeds were not then in the possession of witness. At this time Amon had made no mention of additions to the house.

James Gibbs, chairman of the Patea County Council, said he had. first seen >S. Amon concerning the effect of the' road work on his property at the time the road was blocked. Witness had requested permission to have the necessary excavation work done. Amon had neither refused nor consented, witness being of the opinion that lie: did not know what he. wanted. Later witness understood that Amon wanted an excavation for a new garage, but , it was the too late to arrange tho work with the contractor. Later C. Amon had' suggested that he be allowed to place a garage on the- roadside, but witness pointed out that such per-, mission could not be given. As the result of a later conversation concern- ; ig access to the house, witness had offered to recommend the council to provide a track .from the roadway. Amon had then replied that in addition the council would owe him £250. Witness was then convinced that the demands of claimant were unreasonable and negotiations were broken off. In reply to Mr O’Dea, witness said 1 that should the’ County Council win the case he thought it would inake any, reasonable endeavour to provide access to the property. The president intimated' that there appeared certain l prospects of .reaching an. amicable settlement, and recalled, witness Palmer. / Replying to the president, Palmer said he was prepared to .sell a .strip of land six feet in width in older to give access to claimant’s property. , Mr Gibbs intimated that the rounoil would be prepared to meet the survey fCOS 1 . During the informal discussion which ensued, Mr Palmer offered! to donate die strip of land for the purpose of widening the road, ftnd Mr Gibbs, on behalf of the Countv Council, agreed to have the track made and fenced. The president commended. Mr Palmer on his public-spirited offer and l the eh airman of the council' on the uranner in) which he had offered, to meet' the case. To provide for the. garage tifoe* pT-osid-eut sdi‘g"e^s ! ted.' ■fcfra'fc at snuill section a djoin Ing the house property should be procured by the claimant. On his suggestion the court adjournedl to allow counsel to confer. When the court resumed it was announced that a settlement had) not been reached. Decision was reserved.