CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 9, Issue 554, 3 August 1920, Page 2

CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION

CHARLES DROMGOOL V. TUAKAU TOWN BOARD.

A claim for compensation under the Public Works Act 1908 for alleged damage to property, caused by the alteration of the permanent level of George Street, Tuakau, between the English Church corner and the Roman Catholic Church, was made by Mr.- Charles Drombool, of Tuakau, for £202, from the Tuakau Town Board. The claimant contended that his lands had been injuriously affected by the said works by reason: (1) That direct access to the lands affected had been destroyed; (2) that the excavations made by the board had not been left with sufficient batter to support the land immediately r.djoining the street, and the hedges and fences on the boundary thereof; and, (3) where the level of his land lies below the present level of the street such land had.bee i njuriously affected by throwing the batter of the street over his boundary And by turning storm water out of its natural course over his land. He claimed £202 as compensation for all loss arising out of the construction of

the said public work, made jp as follows: -(I) Estimated cost of making proper approach toiallotments 283, £Co; 284, £3O; 86, «R; 83, £2o.

(2.) Ultimate loss of land through removal of support owing to insufficient batter in the case of allotments 283, MO; 284, E5; B<>, £4; 83, £3O; cost of erecting new fences and hedges, '.20. (3) Damage caused to section 121) as above stated, £2O. Total, £202. The arbitrators consisted of Mr. P. K. Hunt, S.M. (president), Hon. J. G. GarJaifd (M.L.C.J appointed by the claimant, and Mr. W. Claud Mo-

tion, who was appointed by the lown Hoard (assessors), and sat at the Public Hall, Tuakau, yesterday, to hear the case. Mi;, Jas. Chas. Dromgool appeared for the claimant, and Mr. W. P. Endean for the defendants. Counsel for claimant in outlining the facts of the case said the claim was one for compensation to damage done to a number of sections on the main street of Tuakau owned by Mr. Chas. Dromgool. The sections affect ed were Nos. 283, 284, 83, 86 and 129. Sections 83 and 86 were the sections nearest the English church, while sec-

tions 283 and 284 were near the Roman Catholic Church, section 129 being situated in the hollow. The work done on the street consisted of excavation at both ends, and a filling in the middle. The old road, which he submitted was constructed on the permanent level, more or less followed the contour of the country. The effect of the new work was that it lowered the level of the original ■sutting about 10ft, where sections 28') and 284 were situated, while the filling had raised the level of the road, leaving section 129 in a .hollow and sections 83 and 86 also some feet below the level of the road. He claimed proper approaches. He then outlined the estimated cost of the work as contained in the statement of the claim. In answer to the president counsel stated that plaintiff valued the allotments at about £IOO ner section. The clerk of the Town Board (Mr. A. H. Tapper), when asked what was the average rental value of the sec tion, stated that it was £2B 10s. Mr. Endean said he first of all wanted claimant to prove his case. Under the Municipal Corporations Act the road was deemed to be form"ed in a permanent manner. He contended that the work executed had bettered the sections, and claimed further that the land had appreciated fully 100 per cent, through the work. Wit'i reference to section 129, he stated the section before the work was commenced was a swamp, was a swamp still, and was likely to be one for some time. Instead of the work proving detrimental to the sections it had improved the value of the land. It was here pointed out that the board had given access to. other properties, but Mr. Endean stated that where these approaches had been made proper application had been made. In one case where the onard contributed £4O towards an approach the section was actually in occupation. At thi.4 stage the Court adjourned to inspect the locality. Upon resuming the assessors, Hon J. G. Garland and Mr. Motion, retired in older that they should endeavour to come to a settlement. Upon resuming it was stated that they had failed to reach an agree ment. The only evidence taken was that of Jas. Chas Dromgool, solicitor, of Auckland, who said he knew the land and the district for 30 years. He acted as agent for the claimant in purchasing some of the sections, and also for three owners in the neighbourhood. Sections 83, 84 and 86 were in one paddock, with separate titles to each. Section 86 was bought in 1900 for HO. Sections 83 and 84 were acquired about the same time for £23 a piece. Section's 283 and 284 were acquired before his time, and cost about £2O an acre in the eighties. Prior to 1910 the prices were £lO a section and £5 a section on the main .road. In 1906 section No. 126, containing a little over aquarter of an acre, was sold fo.- £3O. The sections were worth, at'the time the work was begun, between £BO and £IOO each. The most any of the .sections were valued at was about £2O and some at £ls—Government valuation in 1916. Before the work was done the difference between the level of the footpath and the level of the road was .about 2ft. The cost of filling sections 83 and 86 would amount to £3O. There was room on section 86 for the erection of two residences, and the cost of making an approach would be about £2O.

To Mr. Endean: Section 83 was worth from £BO to .1-100. He did not admit the new road had advanced the value of the property more than thev had paid in rates.

To Mr. Motion: There was a .slight improvement, but not more than what they were paying for in lates. To Mr. Garland: In his opinion the values of Tjakau properties were rising. To make section 83 a decent building section it would have to be filled work of which would cost about £3O. Provision had been made for storm-water drainage. Before the work was done one could step off the road into the section, and a drive could easily have been made then. It would be a difficult matter now.

Mr. Garland offered to make a sporting offer, and would take £2O for each section.

Mr. Motion said he would give nothing as he considered the property rad benefited considerably by the formation and metalling of a good road.

The chairman said he did not .on sider the claimant was entitled to any compensation for sectioiu S3 and 80 as they had been improved by a decently formed and metalled roadrj With regard to 284 near the Roman CatholieCTißs where there was a deep cutting, Mr. Motion said he would recommend the board to contribute £2O towards providing access to the sections, which amount was equal to the valuation of the section. The claim for compensation for these sections was £lO5.

Mr. Garland offered to reduce the claim by £45 to £6O.

The president said again the sections had not been built on, but at the same time the section on top of ■ the hill had suffered some damage. This claim differed from the first one. A man 'wanted some access to his property. Some damajj had been sustained. The claimant was not a poor man, and he should assist the local authority instead of endeavouring to prevent them from progressing. He allowed £25 for the provision of an access. With regard to section 129, which was a swamp, more or less* }'r. Motion said hi did not consider the claimant was entitled to any compensation for this as no damage had been done. ; Mr. Garland said the land was not ■Utable for a building section, butV Hbghe •''*u'l able for a garden. Thfr llif filling was being \v?shthe section. \ &f§L|fertion said if spoil continued [ U> Slashed on to the property it woujp enhance the value of the promts Worship allowed 50s for the damage done to section 129, and £27 10s on the whole claim. Each party was ordered to defray its own expenses. Assessors fee was fixed at £5 5s each,