Robert James Sternberg t/as Homeworthy Inspection Services v Bielby (No 2)

[2013] QCAT 694

CITATION: Robert James Sternberg t/as Homeworthy Inspection Services v Bielby (No 2) [2013] QCAT 694

PARTIES:	Robert James Sternberg t/as Homeworthy Inspection Services
v
Ian David Bielby

APPLICATION NUMBER: MCD483-13

MATTER TYPE: Other minor civil dispute matters

HEARING DATE: On the papers

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Member Mc Donald

DELIVERED ON: 3 October 2013

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE: The application for correction is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS: Correction - purported miscalculation

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. On 10 September 2013, the respondent Mr Bielby sought a correction of a purported calculation error in the Tribunal’s Order regarding the costs of audit fees. The application proposed that the Tribunal meant to order $3,300 rather than $6,600 for such fees, together with other fees and offsets. He claims that the same files are being audited with duplicated fees being ordered.

2. The Tribunal refers the respondent  to paragraphs 44 which identifies the files assumed by Complete Residential Building Approvals for desk audit, being files :

   a)    BA 52      Thorne/Willara Crt

   b)    BA 63      Rametta/Gegham Station Rd

   c)    BA 72      TJS/Glencoe Rd

   d)    BA 84      Opulance Homes/O’Grady

   e)    BA 86      Peter Butros/Kuhls

   f)     BA 87      JJ Building Services/Mackenzie

   g)    BA 88      Smith/Weetwood Drive

   h)    BA 92      JJ Building Services/Hamlet/Barrymount

   i)     BA 93      JJ Building Services/Noonan/Ibis Crt

   j)     BA 94      Metromax/Daly/Stark Rd

3. At paragraph 49, $3,300 is ordered for these files to be audited.

4. Further, at paragraph 50, 51, 53, 53, 58, the Tribunal identifies the files which have been discontinued and not taken up by Complete Residential Approvals, and for which Mr Sternberg continues to hold liability. 

5. These files are identified as being

   a)    BA 58      Metricon/Gilchrist

   b)    BA 59      Kroft/Stephens

   c)    BA 61      QCroft/Southgate

   d)    BA 70      TJS/Jackson

   e)    BA 73      Metricon/Rangeview

   f)     BA 78      TJS/Opperman

   g)    BA 79      QCroft/Akol

   h)    BA 81      QCroft/Wallace

   i)     BA 82      Q Croft/Anesty

   j)     BA 85      Metricon/Wodella.

6. An audit for these 10 files also made in the further sum of $3,300 at paragraph 62.

7. The Tribunal does not accept that there is an error on the face of the decision, and dismisses the application for correction.