Onus Lies On Both Owner And Builder to Get Permit

Taranaki Daily News, 1 September 1942, Page 4

Onus Lies On Both Owner And Builder to Get Permit

It is as much the duty of the owner of a building as of the builder to see ! that a permit is obtained for its erection. i That the onus lies on both was stressed I in the New Plymouth court yesterday I when three charges in connection with alterations to a dwellmg in Dawson Street came before Mr. W. H. Woodward, S.M. . , John Thomas Curd, builder, who pleaded guilty to erecting a building without obtaining a permit, -was convicted and fined £1 (costs 10s). Curd said he started the work as a repair job but it developed into something bigger. • The ownsr, Bernard Harston, was charged with permitting the alterations without a permit being obtained. The chief inspector, Mr., R. Day, said he had brought the charge simply to bring before the public the fact that the onus was on the owner as much as on the builder to see that a permit was obtained. Harston was convicted and ordered to pay 10s costs only. ' Smart Bros. Ltd., charged with doing sanitary plumbing to the house without a permit, was fined £2 (costs 10s). Mr. Day said it was a straight-out job for which the firm knew it had to have a permit. P. H. Anthony, sanitary inspector, said he inspected the work and part of it did not comply with the standard set down in the regulations.