Newcastle contractor sued over alleged excessive hours on residential project
James Shafren, a Newcastle construction contractor, is being sued by Modern Caves over claims that he billed for implausibly long working days on a residential project. The NSW Supreme Court authorised a search for records and devices that could help establish what work was done, after a judge said the evidence raised a strong possibility of deceit or fraud, or breaches of contract.
Modern Caves alleges Shafren claimed up to 494 hours in a month at $300 an hour, producing invoices of almost $150,000 for his family’s company, Basebuild. The company cited Strava exercise records, sports league information and Facebook posts, and alleges some claimed hours overlapped with other projects. Shafren also billed two hours on his wedding day; the judge said that detail alone was not necessarily implausible. He denies the allegations and intends to defend the case.
- Modern Caves alleges Shafren billed for up to 494 hours in a month.
- Strava and social media records formed part of the court evidence.
- Shafren denies wrongdoing and will defend the proceedings.
New here? Start with this
Construction contracts set out what work will be done and how the contractor will be paid. Disputes can arise when a client questions whether the hours or work listed on invoices match what was actually done.
Modern Caves is the company that commissioned the residential project, while James Shafren is the Newcastle contractor it hired. He billed through Basebuild, a company belonging to his family, and denies the claims.
The case is being heard in the NSW Supreme Court, which can order steps to preserve or obtain evidence while a civil dispute proceeds. The court’s search order allows records and devices to be examined; it does not decide whether the allegations are true.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Modern Caves can argue that invoices for as many as 494 hours in a month, alongside records suggesting Shafren was elsewhere or engaged in other activities during some claimed work periods, justify close scrutiny and recovery of any amounts not properly earned. The court-authorised search may help establish what work was done, while protecting a client’s interest in honest billing and contractual accountability.
The case against
Shafren can argue that the allegations remain unproven and that activity records or social media posts do not necessarily show when he worked, what tasks he performed, or whether the invoices were inaccurate. He is entitled to defend the claim, and the court’s decision to authorise a search is not a finding of fraud; the dispute should be resolved on the full evidence and the contract’s terms.
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Daily Mail as “Aussie builder sued over alleged 19-hour workdays after clients uncover his Facebook and Strava accounts – as he claims he even worked on his wedding day”.