Demolitions company boss John Goros, aka John Gorcilov, and company deceived and misled clients in 2016, top judge says

He claimed he found asbestos on their building sites after work had started, then charged up to $31,000 to remove it – but it was all a lie, a court has found.

They are the words no property owner wants to hear: “We’ve found asbestos, it will need to be removed”.

Dangerous, if not lethal, to humans and incredibly expensive to dispose of safely, few things are worse than the presence of the carcinogenic substance.

Few things except, that is, a demolitions contractor who lies about the presence of asbestos in order to overcharge clients up to $31,000 for his services.

Now, following a joint investigation by three state government departments, John Goros – aka John Gorcilov – and his company Demolition Experts Pty Ltd – aka Hindmarsh Demolition – have been held accountable for their deception.

The Supreme Court has found they engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct while dealing with eight separate clients in 2016.

In his written judgment, Chief Justice Chris Kourakis found Mr Goros and his company:

FALSELY claimed to have found asbestos in worksite rubble.

CHARGED clients extra to dump the non-existent substance.

WRONGLY accepted payment for that work.

EXPLOITED their “bargaining power” over clients, resulting in “gross inequality”.

USED “undue pressure and tactics”.

FAILED to “act in good faith”.

ENGAGED in “conduct which is against society’s norms of good conscience”.

John Goros – aka John Gorcilov – owner of company Demolition Experts Pty Ltd – aka Hindmarsh Demolition. Picture: Twitter

He said Mr Goros “did more than merely confuse” his clients.

“He positively induced the consumers through varied tactics, including pressure and threats, to pay him additional monies for the removal and disposal of asbestos which was not there,” he said.

“He took advantage of the consumers in a variety of ways and exploited the trust that they had in him as the apparent expert in the control of asbestos material.

“Put simply, Mr Goros lied for his own advantage.”

After formally denying the allegations, Mr Goros and the company neither attended nor sent legal representatives to further court hearings – including the trial.

In his judgment, Chief Justice Kourakis said Mr Goros’s “scheme” saw him claim asbestos had been found after demolition had started and was already “mixed into the rubble”.

In one case, Mr Goros falsely claimed SafeWork SA had “shut the site down” due to the discovery of asbestos.

He quoted prices for removal of up to $11,000 and then invoiced for having dumped further non-existent “truckloads”, costing one client almost $41,000.

Chief Justice Kourakis said property owners had described Mr Goros as “aggressive” in their dealings, feeling he was “pressuring (them) to make a decision quickly”.

Mr Goros “lied for his own advantage”, Chief Justice Chris Kourakis found. Picture: Facebook

A receipt issued by John Goros, aka John Gorcilov, to one of his clients for dumping asbestos that did not exist. Picture: Attorney-General's Department

He said Mr Goros told one client: “I tried to be reasonable but now are giving me the run-around, I will contact the Environment Protection Authority in the morning.”

He continued: “They will make you clean the complete block … costs will escalate over $50,000 … I will put a caveat on the property to cover my costs.”

Chief Justice Kourakis said he was satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, Mr Goros was “practising a fraudulent scheme”.

He said it was “improbable” one man could “come across so many instances” of asbestos being used in the same parts of different properties.

He will hear submissions on the penalty next month.

Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs Andrea Michaels welcomed the court’s findings.

She said the case was the result of “an exhaustive, multi-agency investigation” by Consumer and Business Services, the Environment Protection Authority and SafeWork SA.

“Mr Goros lied to each consumer (and) would make threats or use other high-pressure tactics to get them to back down and pay up,” she said.

“He took advantage of consumers, in some cases forcing them to try and find money they did not have and preyed upon their fear.”