A CONTRACT DISPUTE.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXX, Issue 3615, 30 August 1912, Page 5

A CONTRACT DISPUTE.

FOUGHT OUT IN COURT. MAGISTRATE RESERVES HIS DECISION. The Magistrate’s Court at Gisborne yesterday was occupied for some time with the hearing of the case of Thomas R. Warren, builder, v. Cyril White,' sheep-farmer, of Tahora. The statement of claim set forth that plaintiff claimed £sl 9s 9d, being the balance of a contract for the erection of a house for defendant by plaintiff at Tahora and extras, labor and incidentals thereto as per particulars given. Amounts paid in left the nett claim at something over £3O. Mi- Coleman appeared for claimant, and Mr. Nolan for defendant'.

Thomas R. Warren, plaintiff, said that the amounts for carting, £3 10s 6d and £1 were not amounts for which he was liable, because White was to supply all the timber. V 7 hat he was claiming for carting was flooring, rough lining and scantling. All this was taken from town and the charges were fair and reasonable—the amounts witness actually paid the carter. The 250 feet of tongued and grooved flooring, _ for which plaintiff was billed for £2 os, was all used in the house. Witness's foroman ordered .this timber with defendant’s authority. To Mr. Nolan: He remembered seeing a plan of the house before the job was begun, and also measuring the timber to see if there was enough. He could not remember working the timber out against the plan. Witness remembered telling defendant that there was ample timber in accordance wii !i the plan. Witness was to do all the carting and packing of outside — material be supplied. He did not think it fair that he" should pay for carting the extra timber. The reason that he had paid for the extra timber was that the whole of the carting was charged up to him together. To Mr Coleman: Had the house been built as per the original plan, the extra timber would not have been necessary. James Wilson, bookkeeper, employed by George Smith, builder, said He had an entry in his hooks from Mr Warren for '260 feet of tongued and grooved lining, ordered between May 26 and April 1,1909. It was marked “W T bite’s job,” hut he could not sav who ordered it. Witness produced the carter’s docket as having been received by the carter who took the timber to the job. There was actually delivered 291 fee.t. - There were orders for Rimu supers and rough lining on February 23* and 26. R.'J. Gallagher, carpenter, said he was foreman on Mr White’s job, and that two extra lots of timber were brought on to the job and, he thought, two lots of flooring. Defendant gave the order for the first lot of flooring, hut could not remember about the second. Some time in February he ,saw defendant and asked him to have tlie flooring sent out. He thought that a second order for flooring was o-iven, and he remembered a second lot (250 feet) going on to the job. This was towards the end of February. This was used for boarding round a sink, for the back door, and some in makim>- a cupboard. The mean measurement of the flooring for a building 40ft- bv 40ft was 1600 feet. . Arthur Thomas 'Warren, plaintiff s son, said lie was on the job for the first fortnight and found that there was a shortage of timber. He made up an order for the flooring of the whole house of 1700 or ISOO feet. This was for the flooring alone, and flooringmaterial for any other work about the house would have to have been got extra. He was aware that defendant had to supply the timber. R; J. Gallagher said he remembered putting a wages lieu through Messrs Kirk and Burnard for the work on Mr White’s iob, along with a man named Armstrong, the total amount claimed for being paid. Mr Nolan said his contention was that defendant had paid £l3 10s lOd in Court as full payment, and more than Warren was entitled to receive. There were several items which defendant could have disputed, hut lie simplv disputed those items which he held could not' he claimed from him at all. The contract provided that the proprietor was to find the timber, the contractor to find other material and to pay all packing and carting from Gisborne. This would obviously include timber coming from Gisbonre. Plaintiff had informed Mrs 'White that there was ample timber for the house. It was because of that in the contract that it was made to provide for defendant supplying the timber. Warren having objected, defendant agreed to pay for the packing. Defendant had no knowledge of the 250 feet of timber spoken of, )ihd there was no proof that it had arrived

at the job. Cyril White, defendant, said that when the contract was made- plaintiff said there was ample timber. He ordered the extra timber for flooring on Gallagher’s measurement. He could not remember anything of a further 250 feet. The timber was sent in two orders. When plaintiff complained about the extra cost defendant agreed to meet him half way by covering the cost of the packing. In August, 1910, he received an account from plaintiff, but disputed it, and although an arrangement was made plaintiff failed to see witness. He saw plaintiff several times subsequently, hut had never heard him refer to The account. In workers’ liens he had paid £124. To Mr Coleman: The original size of the house was 40ft by 30ft. and a 10ft verandah, making _ 40ft by 40ft over all. It was never intended that the house should be smaller than that. George Bruce said he was packing in the Wharekopao district, and packed some 3,600 feet from Bruce and O’Brien’s to defendant’s house, the timber coming from Mr George Smith, of Gisborne. Defendant paid him for packing the timber, and the other material was partly paid for. When lie presented plaintiff with an account for outside material on one occasion, he said that White was liable.

Defendant’s wife also gave evidence, His Worship reserved his decision.