QUESTION OF A HOUSE

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 3, Issue 212, 13 September 1940, Page 5

QUESTION OF A HOUSE

COURT CALM DISTURBED LANDLORD'S CLAIM FAILS The formal air which usually enshrines a Court -of Law was disturbed somewhat at one stage of the sitting of the Whakatane Magistrates Court when His Worship indicated to the plaintiff in a civil case that he was rather annoyed with plaintiff's 'side-stepping' and stated plainly that he expected a definite 'yes' or 'no' in answer to his questions. Plaintiff, Samuel George Whiteside, was in the witness box, and Mr E. L. Walton, S.M., wanted to know whether a house (the subject of the proceedings) was in a residential area. "For the third time," said Mr Walter, "is the house in a residential area? Yes or no?" Plaintiff said he supposed the answer could be in the affirma<tive, upon which His Worship observed: "That's what you should have said in the first place if you wanted to be truthful." The case was one in which George Samuel Whiteside (Mr B. S. Barry) proceeded against- Stanley West, represented by Mr L. M. Goodacre, Inspector of Factories, Tauranga, for the recovery of £8 17s 6d and possession of the house in Goulstone Road of which plaintiff was the owner and defendant the tenant. Qm te a Coincidence. Counsel for plaintiff handed to the Magistrate a letter from a former tenant, a Miss Lynch, in support of the contention that the dwelling had been used for business purposes. Upon reading it the magistrate said it appeared to be quite a coincidence that the writer, without instruction or directions, as affirmed, had used exactly the same words as are contained in the relevant passage in the- Fair Rents Act.

Plaintiff, in evidence, said that until 1938 the building had been occupied by a Miss Lynch, who used it for music teaching. He described alterations to the building since 1938 in order to make it a dwelling house. Answering Mr Goodacre, plaintiff said that Miss Lynch used the build ing almost exclusively for business purposes. One room was used as a studio and one as a waiting room. He had been a frequent visitor to the place when Miss Lynch occupied it and his visits were ot' a business and social nature. He was sure that one room had been used exclusively as a waiting room and he had seen pupils in there. It would be true to say that Miss Lynch stopped tuition and kept pupils waiting in order to chat with him when he called.

Magisterial Doubt. The magistrate interrupted to observe that he did not believe pupils of a music teacher were kept waiting. An appointed time was the customary procedure. "Is the house in a residential area?" asked Hi's Worship and plaintiff was heard to say something about some shops, a theatre and a hall only a short distance away. "You can side-step whom you like," said the magistrate, "but not me." Plaintiff's answer was again considered unsatisfactory and Mr Walton said: "For the third time; will you answer 'yes' or 'no.' Plaintiff said he supposed that it was 'yes.' "That is what you should have said in the first place if you wanted to be truthful," said His Worship, and then asked whether the building had any distinguishing physical features. Pain tiff said there was always a difference but he supposed there Avas nothing to distinguish it from other houses. Tenant's Evidence. '■Well, I'm going to infer that it is a house in a residential area, with nothing to distinguish it from anything else," said the magistrate, who, continuing, observed: "Here we have a lady friend who writes a letter in answer to you, using the words of the Act. Mr Goodacre submitted that apart from the letter quoted there was no evidence to show that the building had been used purely for business purposes. Mr Goodacre called the tenant, Stanley Walter West, who said he paid 20s per week for the privilege of occupancy. He had been the tenant since November 9th of last year, He had had reason to complain to

the owner about several matters, par tieularly the drainage. In respect to certain open drains, plaintiff's answer to witness's complaint was: "That as they had existed for 30 odd years he didn't see why they should be altered." Defrauding the Taxes. Mr Goodacre considered that 12/6 per week was a fair rent and Samuel George Whiteside, the plaintiff, again entered the box. He said, in answer to Mr Goodacre, that he considered £10 per annum would cover maintenance and he had allowed that sum, although he did not know how much per year he actually spent on the building. He had put the additions on the front of the house with the assistance of some labour and considered that his time was worth something. Questioned on the point of rent payments, plaintiff said that the tenant had paid weekly until some weeks ago. Mr Goodacre asked him whether he had entered tlie. rent as having been paid weekly, when, in fact it had been paid in larger a - mounts, Mr Goodacre adding: "Did you not do so to avoid the stamp tax on the receipt?" The magistrate was of the opinion that both the landlord and the tenant would be guilty of defrauding the taxes, and said that lie would enter judgment for defendant and he would adjourn the fixing of a fair rent until October Bth, by which time various repairs to the property had to be effected. The tenant would not be required to pay rent in the meantime.