TRUST BUILDINGS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 11 February 1943, Page 2

TRUST BUILDINGS

ASSESSMENT OF EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE COMMENT BY MINISTER. CRITICISM CONSIDERED UNJUST. (By Telegraph—Press Association,) WELLINGTON, This Day. Comment on a report submitted by the assessors acting for tlie Masteston Trust Lands Trust in the determination of earthquake damage to Trust buildings is made by the Minister in Charge of the State Fire and Accident Insurance Department, Mr Wilson. The report of the assessors was laid before a meeting of the Trust on Monday. “Presuming that the facts are as stated in the report, it is apparent that in their anxiety to make a good case for themselves the assessors for the Masterton Trust Lands Trust, Messrs Swaii and Lavelle, have misrepresented the State Fire Office in connection with the settlement of the claim made by the Trust against the State Fire Office,” said Mr Wilson. “Following the usual practice in such cases, the assessment of earthquake damage after the first earthquake of June 24 last was placed in the hands of a wellknown firm of architects whose professional capacity and fairness is unquestionable. “The representative of this firm, acting in conjunction with a local architect, representing the Trust, arrived at an agreement on July 27 as regards the damage done by the first earthquake only to the majority but not all of the properties which had been damaged. This, no doubt, is the assessment which Mr Lavelle refers to as ‘the State Fire Department’s original assessment of £3576.’ This assessment, however, was never submitted as a claim and the second earthquake of August 2, which caused further very serious damage, occurred before any further progress had been made. Meantime, the architect originally representing the Trust had found himself unable to act further, and the assessment of damage caused by both the first and second earthquakes became a matter for negotiation and agreement between the architects for the office and Mr Lavelle, who had been appointed by the Trust to replace their previous representative. “These experts agreed on the damage to all the Trust properties from both earthquakes, and the office has paid the amount of the assessment. Obviously there is no fair basis of comparison between a tentative assessment after the first earthquake on some of the properties (which had the approval of the Trust’s own architect) and the settlement arrived at after both earthquakes over all the properties, and Mr Lavelle’s criticism on such a comparison is not only most unjust but quite valueless, ■ though it might be harmful to the office if left unanswered. “The State Office recognises that the assessment of earthquake damage is a matter for experts, and the office left it entirely to the architects to agree as to the damage. The claim was settled several weeks ago.”