CLAIM FOR WORK DONE

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 9, Issue 529, 7 May 1920, Page 2

CLAIM FOR WORK DONE

MOTOR-CAR CASE. JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF. At the Magistrate's Court yesterday before Mr. F. K. Hunt. S.M., E." W. Tabor, motor garage proprietor of Morrinsville. formerly proprietor of the Station Motor Garage, Pukekohe, proceeded to recover from Messrs S. Mills and J. J. Coady, of Pukekohe. t!4 ]!>s Gd, for work done and materials provided for the defendants at their request in overhauling and repairing a motor-car belonging to Isaac Wymer, of Glenbrook, the case was called last coui t day, when an application to have Isaac Wymer joined as defendant was granted. Mr. J. G. Haddow appeared for plaintiff and Mr. Wymer, and Mr. C. 0. Mahoney for defendants. Messrs Mills and Coady. Plaintiff, in the course of his evidence, said in November 1918 he was in business in Pukekohe, having previously taken over Messrs Mills' and Coady's motor business. In November 1918 Mr. Coady saw him and said he had contracted with Mr. Wymer to overhaul his car, but Wymer was complaining that certain

things were not satisfactory. On December 17 Mr. Coady definitely instructed him to do the work. There was the wiring and gate change, and several other matters which needed attention. The car arrived in January. Witness took the broken gate change out and had it repaired in Auckland. The cost of the work was U Bs. The wiring was all wrong, and he had to rewind about 60ft, which cost W. The accumulator, on account of the wiring, was run right down, had sulphated. and had to be repaired. This also cost £3. The car was a Humber. When the job was completed he sent the whole account to Mr. Wymer because a long time elapsed between the delivery of the car by Messrs Mils and Coady to Mr Wymer, and when it had been returned to him. The car had been running about nine months without a gate. The reason he sen the whole account to Wymer was because ha thought defendants would meet and fix it up. Both Coady and Wymer were present when witness received instructions to complete the work.

Mr. Wymer had settled up with witness, and after the case of Mills and Coady v. Wymer, witness saurCoady and said he would send account to them. Mr. Coady said he would repudiate the account. Later he saw Mills, who would have paid him there and then. To His Worship: Coady told him< to put the wiring right, th 3 accumulators, gate change, and afterwards the rear red light. George Weston, motor mechanic said he remembered Mr. Coady coming to the garage more than once when the car was there. He remembered Mr. Coadv looking over the

car. ~ To Mr. Mahoney: Witness did all the wiring except that from the generator to the accumulator. The condition of the wiring was such that it required new wires. The battery appeared quite new when he saw it. Isaac Wymer, farmer, Glenbrook. said Messrs. Mills. Boyle and Coady contracted to put his car in order and supply a one-man hood for £6O. Later he "met Coady in the garage. Tabor was there. They went through the lights, gate, a tail lamp and a few nuts and bolts. Mr. Coady told Mr. Tabor to do the work and charge it up to the firm. Witness was at the garage several times and saw Mr. Coady there. On one occasion Mr. Coady told Mr. Tabor to put the tail lamp on. After the present action had been brought Mr. Coady had told him he had withdrawn the instructions. The work that was undertaken was never finally done. To Mr. Mahoney: He understood that the work done by Mr. Taboi was to be paid for by Mills and Coady. He never passed the account he received from Mr. Tabor on to Mills and Coady. To the Magistrate: The gate was broken in the garage and was not re•ed and put back. He had difficulty in changing his gears. Sometimes it was going backwards wht n he thought it was going forward. He had to guess whore the- various gear changes were. To Mr. Mahoney: When he got the car from Mills and Coady the fir; t time he d;ove it for about nine months, and it was then taken to Mr. Tabor. To Mr. Haddow: He had the car for about nine months, but it was nearly always in the garage. Th-' car was never handed back to him finished.

John Joseph Coady, foimerly of the firm of Mills, Boyle and Coady said there was only one occasion on which he, Wymer and Tabor met, when Wymer came into the parage. Wymer complained about his car lights. Wymer was told the business had changed hands. He called M. . Tabor and introduced Wymer as oiu of his clients, and told him that Wymer was not too pleased about the lights, which would not burn. He asked him'to look over the lights and thaige the account to him. The same morning he asked Wymer for some money. Wymer said he was not pleased with the job, but as soon as the work was completed to his satisfaction he would pay witness. The latter decided to quit the job and get a settlement of the account. Hi returned to Tabor and informed him that he was sick and tired of the job, as he could not get money from Wymer. He thereupon cancelled any instructions. Up till the last case between witness and Wymer there wano account from Tabor. Had theie been one it would have been included in witness's account when the case was heard. With regard to it was broken when it came in to the garage. The question of gate was never mentioned. The ca:

was in a very bad state of repair it having been used practically as a lorry on the muddy roads at Glenbrook. From his own personal know ledge he would say that the car had travelled about 2000 miles. He kne\. of several occasions when the ca v had been diiven to Auckland. This was all after they had completed the repairs. To Mr. Haddow: Witness came t<>

the conclusion th.it Wymer kept coming to the garage for cheap run ning lepairs. He was absolutely "full up" of tha whole job, and can celled the instructions given to Tabor. This concluded thp case. His Worship came to the conclusion that both defendants should contribute towards the settlement of the account. Mr. Tabor had donv the work and was entitled to pay ment. He entered judgment fo plaintiff against Messrs Mills and Coady for >:*> 15s; £4 for the repair of the £2 for the fixing of the wiling and 15s for a tail lamp, and against Mr. Wymer .KG 19s; £3 12s repairs to accumulator, 7s cartage and £:l for the cost of the wires Both defendants to equally divide the costs. Secuiity for an appeal on behalf of Mr. Wymer was fixed at U2 125..j