PRICE OF MOTORS

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIV, Issue 4536, 7 March 1923, Page 2

PRICE OF MOTORS

NETHERTON COMPLAINTS. REDUCTION DECLINED. At the monthly meeting of the Thames Valley Power Board yesterday Mr R. H. Heappey, representing the Netherton Ratepayers’ Association, applied for a reduction in the price of motors supplied-by the Board t 0 members of his association. Mr Heappey stated that the settlers in Netherton had signed up agreeing to take motors at the same time as tlie Huirau Road settler.-',, yet the Netherton farmers had been charged £39 per motor, as against £3O each to the Huirau Road settlers. He contended that the increase of £9 was not fair, and that, the Netherton people should have been supplied at, the same rate as the Huirau Road settlers. Mr Heappey said that even at £3O each the price was heavy. He had received a quotation from a Paeroa flrm for the installation of a G.E. 2 h.p. motor (similar to those sunplied by the Board) at|£22. Auckland firms were also quoting prices below those charged by the Board. He considered that the settlers should regard the Power Board as their own, and accord it all possible support, but they could not see their way to pay so much extra for motors, and he would like to know why the anomaly existed as regards Netherton and Huirau Road. The speaker contended that if the Board could reduce the price by £9 on the Huirau Road section, then the same reduction should apply tp Netherton. Mr Flatt asked Mr Heappey if no was citing one case at, £39, with power available, and another at £3O, without power. Mr Heappey said that he was. The chairman (Mr F. 11. Clayton) pointed out that after January 30, 1923, the price of motors was reduced by £9. irrespective of area, but it was not feasible that such reductions should be made retrospective. He said that Mr Heappey’s motor had been supplied with power, and was working in November, 1922. It was quite correct that the Huirau Road settlers had signed up for their motors about the same time as the Netherton people. Owing to non-ar-rival of transformers the Huirau Road people were unable to have power, although their motors had been installed. Therefore, it was reasonable that, they should participate in the reduction in the price of motors, as their motors had not been used when the drop in price came. Mr Flatt: How about if a rise had taken place ? The Chairman: The ratepayers would have had to bear it. Mr McCormick said he considered that in the event of a reduction the consumers should be notified accordingly. The chairman said that the burden of prices must be borne by the consumers. Mr Flatt contended that it should be pulbicly known that the price of motors was chargeable~from the date the power was turned on, and not from the date of the installation of the motor. If this was made known it would remove much misunderstanding. The chairman said he fully concurred with Mr Flatt. The motor was not actually sold until the “juice” was supplied. The chairman said lie was unable t,o grant the request of the Netherton ratepayers for a reduction. The principle was perfectly equitable, and no business firm could be expected to make reductions in any line of goods retrospective, and he trusted that Mr Heappey would be able to see the Board’s side of the position, and explain matters satisfactorily to the Ratepayers whom he was represtencing.