GJR Homes v Harris

[2010] QCAT 205

CITATION: GJR Homes v Harris [2010] QCAT 205

PARTIES:	Graham John Richards t/a GJR Homes
v
Gregory John Harris

APPLICATION NUMBER:   BD293-09

MATTER TYPE: Building matters

HEARING DATE:     Decision on the papers

HEARD AT:  Brisbane

DECISION OF: Peta Stilgoe

DELIVERED ON: 6 May 2010

DELIVERED AT:      Brisbane

ORDERS MADE: The respondent pay the applicant $20,582.10 by 27 May 2010.

CATCHWORDS :  Costs plus contract – progress claims – where not paid – where interest claimed

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

APPLICANT: 

RESPONDENT: 

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. On 30 September 2008, the parties entered into a “cost plus” building contract. Mr Richards issued progress claims pursuant to the contract. Mr Harris paid some, but not all, of the progress claims issued.

2. Mr Richards has provided detailed evidence to support the quantum of his claim. His evidence is that the total amount owing by Mr Harris was $51,915.49 and that Mr Harris has paid $34,943.85, leaving a balance of $16,971.64.

3. In his submissions filed 1 March 2010, Mr Harris says:

a)Mr Richards told him the work would not cost more than $90,000. When Mr Harris ejected Mr Richards from the site he was less than half way through the job but had charged more than $60,000.

b)Mr Harris received cheaper quotes than the amount charged by Mr Richardson for the same work. He claims that Mr Richardson overcharged for the labour involved in the deck by $2,680.

c)Mr Richards overcharged for work, charged for labour when no actual work was being undertaken, charged for travel and meal breaks. Mr Harris says that the overcharge in relation to travel is $3,978; the overcharge for meal breaks is $8,450.

d)Mr Richards wrongly disconnected an air conditioner which had to be replaced at a cost of $1800.

e)Mr Harris paid Mr Richards $800 for a certifier who never certified the job.

1. In his defence filed 20 July 2009, Mr Harris says that the work completed by Mr Richards was defective and required rectification. This allegation is not repeated in his submission of 1 March 2010, nor does he provide any evidence to this effect.

2. Mr Harris has not filed any statements in support of his submissions, despite a further opportunity to do so provided by my order of 26 March 2010. Mr Richardson has filed a number of statements from his employees that support his claim for labour and highlight some of the difficulties of this project. I accept the detailed evidence of Mr Richardson over the non-specific, and unsupported, allegations of Mr Harris.

3. I accept Mr Richardson’s claim for $16,971.64 and direct that Mr Harris pay Mr Richardson that sum.

4. Mr Richardson also claims interest at 15% pursuant to item 24 of the contract. He calculates interest on the whole sum for a period of 494 days. I calculate the daily interest as $6.97 per day. As at today’s date, the balance has been outstanding for 518 days. I direct that Mr Harris pay Mr Richardson interest of $3,610.46.

5. I direct that Mr Harris pay Mr Richardson $20,582.10 by 27 May 2010.