This drawn out, pending case against David Isaac goes back to August 2006. Two complainants, Joseph B. Urry and Edmund Barbara, are involved. We have referred to this case every Sunday since December 31.

I asked Mr Isaac for his comments and at last we have received letters from his lawyer and from Messrs Barbara and Urry.

Here follows the letter from Mr Isaac's lawyer:

I am writing to you on behalf of my client David Isaac. My client has not lived at the indicated Bugibba address for the last five years. He is now living at Flat 3, Buontempo Estate, Balzan Valley, Balzan.

I refer to the two insertions, which appeared in your column.

In regard to Joseph Urry, please note that my client is still owed the amount of Lm200 for work executed in Mr Urry's property. My client contests most vehemently the alleged payment of Lm85 and Lm50 because these have never been paid to my client.

Indeed, Mr Urry has not paid one cent to my client for materials supplied and work executed by my client. It is true that my client has stopped executing works at Mr Urry's property but this was done because every request for payment to Mr Urry had fallen on deaf ears and hence my client availed himself of his right to stop the execution of work.

As to the claim filed against my client by Edmund Barbara, my client acknowledges the payment made on account by your client for works to be executed at Mr Barbara's property. My client calculates that the work actually executed to date in the interests of Mr Barbara amounts to Lm650. This comprises also the price for materials used in such work.

Mr Barbara has forbidden my client from continuing the works and moreover he has refused to return the tools of my client.

In the circumstances therefore my client has been left with no other alternative but to sue both Mr Urry and Mr Barbara for the balance actually due to him and, in regard to Mr Barbara to have his tools returned to him. (Jos. A. Schembri)

Here is Mr Urry's reply:

Regarding the comments made by Mr Isaac's lawyer, I would like to point out that these are all incorrect.

After many promises to carry on with my work, which he never kept, I told Mr Isaac that I am going to feature a letter in a local paper, a copy of which I had sent him at 7, Karin Court, Tourists Street, Bugibba, on August 28, 2006, but this was returned to sender marked 'unknown' as that was the only address he had always given me.

Mr Isaac never mentioned any amount, until he read my letter on December 31 in The Sunday Times, because he had voluntarily suggested that he will do the work free of charge to compensate for my services rendered to him for a number of years whenever he needed.

I was to pay Lm85 for the material used, which I did on April 20, 2006, without receiving a receipt. The material in question was bought on May 12, 2006.

Further on, I commissioned him to strip and paint the main entrance door, labour and material costs to amount to Lm80. I only gave him Lm50 on the spot but no material was ever bought. In fact, I did the job myself during the summer of 2006.

The other Lm5 I had to pay the lad whom Mr Isaac brought to notch the wall. He did not have the intention to stop work because I did not pay him as every time I used to phone he used to tell me I have a hotel to finish.

I even offered to feature a letter on the same page when the whole job is finished, to which he consented. The last conversation was on Monday, January 16, and he promised to come and finish work on Friday or Saturday, January 19 or 20, 2007, which as usual did not materialise.

The only thing I am asking is that Mr Isaac refund the Lm50 together with a signed note that the matter is now closed and each of us will go his own way. (Joseph B. Urry)

Here is Mr Barbara's reply:

Thanks for e-mailing the letter by David Isaac through a lawyer.

In the letter, I do not see any legal aspect because this has been written because you requested Mr Isaac to make his comments to you in writing and, since he is unable to write as such, you advised him to get a lawyer to write on his behalf.

Therefore, at this stage, I do not see it is appropriate for me to reply through my lawyer since I can make the comments myself, but if this drags on, then I shall have to take the necessary legal action, now that I am in possession of his identity details.

The letter starts by referring to the fictitious name David Isaac and not his proper name, Issa Isslam Tawfik Issa.

Para 1 says that Mr Isaac did not use the Bugibba address for the last five years, but the receipt by Mr Mr Isaac for the Lm500 shows the Bugibba address and this is dated 16/07/05. This already shows bad faith.

The same letter says that he is now living in Balzan, but during the meeting which you and I had with Mr Isaac at my premises on Tuesday, January 16, I indicated to him that I have his address of Balzan among other addresses, but he stated that he lives in Cospicua, and at this point you asked him for his proper address in order to be able to correspond with him, and at this stage we asked him for his identity card.

The I.D. shows the Cospicua address.

Therefore the letter by his lawyer is misleading from the very beginning.

As regards his calculations of the work carried out, it is a big lie, because although he sent some employees, these did not work according to the trade and we immediately informed Mr Isaac to stop them and send proper tradesmen. He sent others but they made a mess.

We gave him enough chance to send the right people but he failed to continue the work assigned to him. We have telephoned him several times and, in spite of promising to come to talk with us, he never came. We also agreed with him that he was to refund our money, continue with the work as agreed and we would pay him accordingly. He never came.

Therefore, contrary to what he stated in his letter, we never forbade him from continuing, but on the contrary he never honoured the agreements. We never refused to return any tools, but he never came to collect the two beams and wooden plank that he or his people left behind.

Otherwise, Mr Isaac did not have any tools and he even did not provide the workmen that he has sent with the appropriate tools because his workmen asked us to provide them with a pick (baqqun), ladder, boards (fallakki) and also an electric extension.

The electric extension was later taken by Mr Isaac himself for use in some other place and, after we repeatedly asked him to return it, it was returned damaged.

For your information, apart from all this, on Wednesday of last week, Mr Isaac came to our office and acted as if he was going to refund the deposit after legal pressure, but he did not succeed to obtain funds. He asked us to go 50:50 but we did not approve. He asked us to give him a chance to get the money and we agreed that tomorrow, Friday, he will come with the money. I am not very optimistic.

Thanks for your interest. (Edmund Barbara)