TRESPASS ALLEGED
£6OO DAMAGES ASKED TENANT SUES LANDLORD DAMAGE DONE TO HOUSE A claim for damages amounting to £6OO for alleged trespass was heard in the Supreme Court at Hamilton today before His Honour Mr Justice Callan and a jury of 12. Plaintiff was Mary Sw’arbrick, married woman, of Huntly, tenant of the premises known as “ Glenloth House,” Huntly, and defendant was Albert Edward Powell, owner of the premises. Mr N. -S. Johnson appeared for plaintiff and defendant 'conducted his own case. The grounds of the action as stated in evidence were that on June 24 last defendant unlawfully entered the premises while occupied by plaintiff and removed three windows; that on June 29 defendant again entered the premises, disconnected pipes to the water tanks, allowed water to escape, blocked up three chimneys and removed washtubs. Plaintiff further alleged that she had been inconvenienced by defendant in her lawful occupation of the premises, and claimed £2OO general damages for the trespass allegedly committed by defendant in removing windows, and £4OO general damages for alleged trespass in disconnecting pipes, blocking chimneys and removing wash tubs.
Plaintiff stated that she had been the tenant of the house in question since August 4, 1936. When she had taken the house it was on the understanding that plaintiff would have sole tenancy, for which she agreed to pay 15s a week rent, on a monthly payment basis. There had been another tenant in the house, occupying the two front rooms, when she took possession, but that other tenant had only been expected to stay a further three weeks. He had, however, stayed until Christmas Eve, 1936, after which defendant, instead of. giving plaintiff entire possession had re-let the rooms occupied by the first tenant. These had then been let to a couple, but plaintiff had got rid of the couple by cutting off the electrlo power. Defendant’s Alleged Threats Following this action, plaintiff, who had then been a cleaner working at the Huntly school, had been interviewed at the school by defendant, who was accompanied by a Maori. Defendant had on that occasion stated that he would “ fix her up” and put her furniture In the street. He had threatened “to fire the place,” If necessary. A month’s rent was due the following day, and plaintiff had offered it to defendant, who had refused it.
Windows Removed From House
On June 10 plaintiff had received notice to quit the premises from defendant’s solicitor, but she had ignored the notice, un June 24 plaintiff had been in town. When she returned she found that Powell and the Maori had taken out one of the windows opening from the front rooms and were taking out another.
She then went to the police and later to her solicitor, the latter writing to defendant asking for the immediate replacement of the windows. On returning from the solicitor's office plaintiff found that the three front windows had been removed, frames &nd all. That night the weather was stormy, rain coming in through the window’ openings and the wind tearing blinds and curtains. It was five days after, on June 29, when plaintiff next saw defendant, this time in a store, when plaintiff offered defendant rent due. He had refused it, however, and announced that he was going to “ fix her off.” Defendant had then driven round to the house.
Plaintiff did not Immediately return as she was nervous, but when she did get back home she found that the pipes running from the five tanks on the house were disconnected and the water was running away. The tubs in the wash-house had been removed and the house itself was full of smoke. Chimneys Blocked Up investigation of the chimneys showed that a chimney pot had been broken in pieces and stuffed down the chimney in a sack with some bricks. The other vent of the double chimney had bags weighted with stones over the top and the one single chimney had been similarly treated. She had left the dinner on the range before Foing to town and returned to find it covered with soot and quite spoiled, l’our or five leaks had also developed in the roof.
The ellect of the occurrence on plaintiff had been to upset her and rob her of sleep. She had also been frightened by the occurrences but didnot «now of any oilier house in Iluntlv to which she chukl go. Cross-examined by defendant, plaintiff said she was aware of other people who had. lived in four rooms of the house prior to her entry. Plaintiff denied the suggestion that it was agreed that she was to get only four rooms of the house for the rental of 15s a week, it was true that there was some furniture in I lie house when she entered. Plaintiff denied the suggestion that she had only shown and not offered the rent to defendant on June 29. I\. S. Caldwell, solicitor, of. Hunlly, ! stated that lie had acted as solicitor for plaintiff. The latter had consulted him on June 2 4 regarding the first incident at the house. Witness had seen defendant on July 3 and had tendered rent lo him up to that date j from plaintiff. Defendant would not' take the rent but told witness to hand i it. to his, defendant’s, solicitor. Wit - I ness had paid £J3 10s in this way on July 6. covering rent due up to July 5. Witness had lived in Huntly since 1919. j Ever since he had been there It had been exceedingly difficult to get a house In Huntly. He did not know of any house to which plaintiff could go at present. In the opinion or the witness, the house in question did not comply with the requirements of borough by-laws in respect to apartment houses nr flats, lie considered that 15s a week was a fair rent, for the house, as the house i was old and too large for a normal ■ family. On June 24, witness had seen the house and found three windows miss- ! m previous coiuiuu.j_
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT19370825.2.75
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Waikato Times, Volume 121, Issue 20281, 25 August 1937, Page 8
Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,016TRESPASS ALLEGED Waikato Times, Volume 121, Issue 20281, 25 August 1937, Page 8
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Waikato Times. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.