View report page

34
On 15th July, Mr. B. Cohen was summoned for failing to remedy the defective
roof, etc., at No. 4, Matilda Place. A closing order was made by the Magistrate.
On 16th July, Messrs. Franks & Simons were summoned for failing to remedy
the defective roof at No. 23, Burslem Street. The work having been done at the
hearing of the summons, they were fined £1 with £2 4s. costs.
On 16th July, Mr. W. Rutkowski was summoned for failing to remedy the
defective roof gutters, and rain-water pipes at No. 10, Ellen Place. An order to
abate the nuisance within seven days was made by the Magistrate, and he was fined
£1 with £2 8s. costs.
On 16th July, Mr. W. Rutkowski was summoned for failing to remedy the defective
roof, gutters and rain-water pipes at No. 11, Ellen Place. An order was made
to abate the nuisance within seven days, and he was fined £1 with £2 2s. costs.
On 20th July, Mr. M. C. Liell was summoned for failing to remedy the defective
drain at No. 63, Skidmore Street.
Towards the end of 1919 a Magistrate's Order was made against Mr. M. C. Liell
to abate a nuisance cause by the defective condition of the drain. The Order
specified the work required to be done which was to reconstruct the drainage system
and to connect with the sewer in Skidmore Street. The drain was reconstructed
as far as the boundary wall of No. 61 but the owner refused to proceed further,
the drain passing underneath No. 61 of which he was not the owner. No part of
the drainage of No. 61 is connected with the combined drain of Nos. 63 and 65.
When the latter was constructed and the plan of the combined drain accepted by
the late vestry of Mile End, the ground on which No. 61 now stands, was an open
space. Had No. 61 not been built on this open space, there is no doubt the owners
of Nos. 63 and 65 would have admitted their liability. The portion of the drain of
Nos. 63 and 65 which runs under No. 61 was in a defective condition and the
question to be decided was, who was responsible for repairing it. The owner of
No. 61 denied liability, as the drainage of No. 61 was not connected with it in any
way, and the owner of Nos. 63 and 65 denied that he had any right or authority
with regard to No. 61.
On July 30th, 1920, Mr. Liell was summoned for non-compliance with the
Order made by the Magistrate in the previous December. The summons was
dismissed and a notice was then served on the owner of No. 61. The latter refused
to remedy the defective drain, maintaining that the drain does not belong to him
as his house has a separate drainage system.
On 21st July, the owner of Newman's Buildings, Leyden Street, was summoned
for failing to remedy the dilapidated and dirty condition of the walls and ceilings.
An order to abate the nuisance within 28 days was made by the Magistrate with
£2 8s. costs. (Owners were not known, and no one was collecting the rent.)