A NOVEL CASE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 19876, 18 February 1920, Page 7

A NOVEL CASE.

WANTED TO RAISE RENT. TENANT COES TO LAW. A housing case, novel to the South island, was heard before Mr IS. J3. MXanhy, S.M.. in. the Magistrate's Court this morning. Application was made by IV. Slaughter, inspector of factories ou behali ol It. H. Lang lord, the tenant, of 10. block ton St-roet, St. Albans, for an order determining the capital value of the dwellinghousG “ for tho purpose of I art L of ttie War Legislature Amendment Act, 1916, and us amendments ' 1 (regarding rent). Jlic‘l\ur legislation Act, 1917. contains the following amendment:—‘-On application in writing by the tenant of any dwcllinghouse to which Part 1 of ini n1 fa‘gislauon Amendment Act, 1916, applies, any inspector of factories may make application on behalf of the tenant for the determination by a Stipendiary Magistrate of the capital value of that dwcllinghouse pursuant to section seven of the said Act.” Part 1 of the Mar Legislation Amendment Act, 1916, provides that “where the rent of a dwcllinghouse to which this part of this Act applies has been .fiinco the commencement of the present war, or is hereafter during thecontinuaheo of this Act, increased above the standard rent as hereinafter defined, the amount by which the rent payable exceeds'the amount which would havo boon payable bad the increase not been niaclo shall, notwithstanding anv agreement to the contrary, be irrecoverable-, provided that ” —The provisions make allowance for increases of rates, improvements or structural alteration expenditure, etc. The standard rent referred to is S per cent of the 1911 value of the property, and this value t]ie Magistrate is given power to determineMr 1L A. Cuihbcrt. represented the landlord. Tho inspector said that tho house in Flockton Street was' owned by Henry Allori Grant. It. was a five-roomed house, and it had been rented for tho past four years by Langford, who paid 16s per week for it. In November, 1919, Langford received notice from the landlord that the rent would be increased to 2os per week. The tenant objected, and continued to pay 16s per week as formerly.' This was'accepted by the landlord as part, payment of the rent due. Application was made to hmi (the inspector) to hove the capital -vnine ol the. house, fixed. He wrote to the landlord asking him if he wore prepared to accept rent at 8 per cent on the 1911 valuation (£510), but received no reply, and the case was accordingly brought into Court. Under the Act, a re-valuation could be made. This had been made, and the present valuation was £570. The Magistrate had poner to consider the two valuations in deciding the capital value of the property, hut tho rent must not exceed 8 per cent of such value.. BL Buller, of the Government valuation Department, crave evidence regarding the valuations."' lo Mr Cufhbert: There had been a great increase in the values of city residential properties since 1914. ‘ The owner ot tho house in question had done nothing towards increasing its value. The £SO increase in value was not verv considerable, but depreciation had to bo allowed for. So many people had been coming back to this country and huymg houses with Government grants that a ]l sorts of old rubbish was being sold. He did not assert that the house in question was old rubbish, but it wanted a lot of doing up. if a competent land salesman said that tho place Tvas worth £7OO or £BOO. and would undertake to sell it at that, witness would "say that he was trving to take somebody down.” Edward -Stringer, house inspector, appointed by the Workers’ Dwellings Board, said lie inspected 10, Flockton .-ticet. this month. He. considered tho outside value of the; Wait £575 , 0 bouse had not seen paint “for a ong. long time/’ Many houses had been sold in Christchurch at much more than the Government' valuations shoot 1 ?! to i ngGnt ? . llarassin S tenants about the houses being sold ” If the owner of tho Flockton ' Street house Tushod to profiteer ho might possiblv oil it for £BOO. People were driven to pay excessive prices. J lr + . : Why did not- vour valuation take into consideration'the the hoire?'' 011 )d ol) tained to-dny for Witness replied that the did not coil“t r n,l h0 r P r nt , prico a stab!o borne ot these houses will fall right back soon, ’ he said. A mortgagee Lmn' r-ro thc pr °l ,cri . v a, ‘ more advaime J ° ° r th ° P ur Pose of making an Sn ’ c * tbab tbo P royis ions nr P vln ( ‘\ VC -' e p -f s,l . mnh 'v framed to res, H r r <e fi am s as the result of the netiiious rises in house values during and after tho war. The value ot thc house should not. therefore he computed upon the present possible selling price for the purpose of fixing the rent. 11 .in,l^S Utl l b ?i rt Mi,] tl,nt I,is ob’ent had md<istood that no evidence regardin'' the house would lie called, as he was p l? p,, !. ed t0 aoeept (he Government t ablation. The effect of calling evidence was that the Flockton Street house had been singled out for particular not ice by the. evidence given. lie was prepared to admit that mam- of the house, values at present were fictitious Some months neo Gran* re ce.ved nn offer 0 f £BOO for tho house. ' ;:ol! at : that figure, hut reVin Al gvcnl lnf ' ro:il? e in house -lues at the present, time,” r .nd raised bis rent, (hen ho ascertained that tho maximum rent- chargeable was based on ■io 1914 valuation of tho house. If ], O had known that the value ol the, house was to ho disputed in the evidence his. client, would have brought competent salesmen to prove that the house would fetch £7OO to £B-00 and rebutting evidence that tho house was in ordinary good condition, and that the tenant had not complained of nuv 'defecls in the house. He would "ham bked lo establish that the present, sell- - le- mVa l" r°cL tho ,louso Wils between £iiO and £BOO. The Magistrate said that be would accept tho. contention regarding the present veiling vnlno of the house. He reserved Ins judgment.