CLAIM FOR DAMAGES.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 5098, 9 March 1927, Page 3

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES.

COLLISION WITH METAL TRUCK. HAMILTON MOTORIST’S ACTION., A rather unusual claim was heard before Mr F. W. Platts, S.M., at the Paeroa Magistrate’s Court yesterday, when J. Dawson, plumber Hamilton, proceeded against the Tirohia Quarry Co., Ltd., alleging that on May u la.:t he was driving his car along the main ' from Te Aroha to Paerja wl.en truck belonging to the defendants and laden with, metal w.as driven in a negligent manner by one of their employees, and as a resuit collided with his car and damaged it. Plaintiff claimed £5 for repairs to the car and £25 for loss of .the use of the car tar fourteen days, and depreciation. Mr R. D. Macfarlane (Hamilton) appeared for plaintiff and Mr J. C. Carroll (Te Aroha) for the defendant company. James Dawson plumber, Hamilton, plaintiff, stated that on the day in question he was driving from Hamilton to PaerOia. When at Tirohia he rounded a corner and found a horse drawing some trucks on the wrong side of the read. He noticed a horse galloping along, but the manuka obscured the view, and he did not know that the animal was attached to trucks or that he was approaching a tramline. There were no notices or warning designs to show that a tramline had to be crossed. The horse ;• voided the car by turning sharply to the right, but the trucks hit the car and pushed it on .to the-side of the ‘road among the manuka. The runningboards of the car were damaged and other parts of the vehicle knocked about. After the collision the driver, of the horse attached to the trucks approached him. He asked the man : f he had no control oyer the trucks, and the man said he had not; he had 1:0 brake. When asked why he did not have reins on the horse the man replied that reins -were no good when the horse was in front of the trucks. While disengaging his car from the trucks plaintiff said that another man came up from the direction of the quarry and asked the driver of the trucks why he had not hooked the horse on to the rear of the trucks instead of in front. Plaintiff said he was able .to drive his car on to Paeroa, where he had adjustments made F—and then drove on to- Waihi, where he was working. The car w,as necessary to his work as he also had a contract in progress at Hamilton. The car was insured, but it had naturally deteriorated in value, and considerable inconvenience had been caused through loss of,the car. To Mr Carroll plaintiff said that the accident took place some time after mid-day on May 5 last. A claim was not made against the company until November 30. The claim at that time was for £5, and the car was then in running order again. When the summons was issued the claim was made up to £3o*. Of that sum £2O was for depreciation of the car following the accident Plaintiff maintained he had kept to the metalled road jBFto the time he had been struck Frhy the trucks, and contended that the growth of ti-tree had largely obstructed his view of the tram tracks. His speed at the time .was from 15 to 18 miles an hour. When about ten yards from the rails he slowed down the car, but could not pull up until after the rails had been reached. It was quite possible that, he had stated at the time that he was in a hurry to get to W.aihi. Tire horse was going at a hand-gallop, with the trucks behind him. It was possible .that the trucks did not have brakes on them and that the company had since had brakes put on the trucks. , A. S. Pendergast, teacher, Tirohia, said that he passed the scene <f the accident twice daily. A stranger to the locality might easily think that *”'the tramlines were parallel to the . road until he was close on to the rails. Clumps of ti-tree about Bft high partly obscured the view of the trucks on the right-hand side. In his. opinion the fact that scrub was growing on the roadside and the absence of warning notices made the crossing a dan- ~ gerous one. F. Roberts, motor mechanic, Waihi, gave evidence as to the repairs done to the car and said lie considered that the selling value of the car had been decreased by about £3O. THE DEFENCE. Mr Carroll stated that the defence would be a complete denial off the' prosecution. Thomas B. Williams, labourer employed by the defendant company at time °f the collision, detailed the mode of trailing the trucks from the quarry to the loop-line near the road. There was a slight rise in the line across the road which, required a horse to pull the trucks out across the road. ' The horse used had been employed on the work for a considerable time and understood the work as well as a man. Proceeding along the line to the road the pace would ■be about three to five miles ap hour. Plaintiff was travelling along the mud road -when witness first saw him, about a chain away. In his opinion ’ the accident was caused by plaintiff coming up off the clay road and trying to cross the tram track on to the metal. Had plaintiff continued on from the mud road the accident would have been avoided. Witness signalled to stop his car, but he did ?iot do so. Witness said he did not jump off the trucks until he saw that a collision was inevitable. There was one brake Tor the four trucks, and that had always been found to be sufficient. The car appeared to be; travelliiie at about 25 miles an hour. Mr Macfarlane witness denied that the horse was galloping. Clarence Tilsley, another employee of the company, gave corroborative evidence of having seen the car coming along the clay road and detailed ihe events leading up to the collision. Harold G. Menzies, factory manager, Te Aroha, stated that he arrived on the scene’ soon after the accident ocL £i*ered. Plaintiff asked witness if he be a witness, for his side. Plaintiff aHo remarked at the time that be could see the trucks coming, but

he gave it a go to get across. To Mr Macfarlane witness stated that it was about a couple of months since he had been advised that he was required as a witness. In rebuttal Mr Macfarlane tendered evidence obtained from the Public Works Department, Paeroa, relating to the state of the weather in May last.

Tliis closed the evidence, and the magistrath said that he desired to. reserve -his decision until he h.ad visited the locality. He would give h'is decision at a special fixture to be held on Wednesday next.