A day after a former Bermuda Housing Corporation employee was convicted for fraud, a call was made for a probe into apparently conflicting court evidence regarding payment for work on a former BHC General Manager?s home.

The matter centres on dealings between Raymonde Dill and carpenter Steven Barbosa, who did work at the then-BHC chief?s home in Langton Lane, Pembroke, in summer 2001.

A court case in 2003 established that Terrence Smith ? convicted this week of defrauding the BHC ? was responsible for paying the carpenter. However, giving evidence during Smith?s Supreme Court trial this week, Mr. Dill said that he was in fact responsible.

Deputy Opposition Leader Michael Dunkley, who has taken a keen interest in the BHC saga, said that the matter should be looked into.

Mr. Barbosa was a key witness in the case against former BHC Property Officer Smith. He helped Smith carry out the fraud by submitting overpriced bills to the BHC.

The civil case on January 16 2003 saw Mr. Barbosa sue Mr. Dill for unpaid work done at Mr. Dill?s home. reported at the time that Magistrate Edward King threw out the case, urging Mr. Barbosa to sue Smith, because he was the one employing him.

Mr. Barbosa had given evidence that he put in cedar doors and windows and a Formica kitchen counter top, and was paid in cash by Mr. Smith. But he claimed that when he put in a cedar circular staircase and railings and tiled a porch, he was owed $6,802, but was not paid.

Mr. Dill (pictured) got Mr. Barbosa to admit in court that he had been hired by someone else do to the work for him. As plain-clothed Policemen took notes, the carpenter then admitted he had been engaged to do the work by Mr. Smith who was not in court. Mr. King said he was satisfied that the work was done at Mr. Dill?s house, but that Mr. Smith had employed him. He said: ?The piper looks for payment from the person who had called the tune. There is nothing to stop you going back and suing Smith for the money.?

However, the evidence that Mr. Dill gave during Smith?s trial at Supreme Court on Tuesday appeared to contradict this. Consultant to the Department of Public Prosecutions Kulandra Ratneser asked him who was responsible for paying Mr. Barbosa for the staircase and kitchen work, and Mr. Dill answered it was his responsibility to pay the carpenter, which he had done ?in part?.

In answer to a number of questions from Mr. Ratneser over who had organised or contracted the work, Mr. Dill replied that Smith had recommended Mr. Barbosa for the work, but that the work to be done had been specified by himself.

Referring to the previous court case, Mr. Ratneser said: ?It failed because you made the position that the contract was made by Mr. Smith.?

Mr. Dill replied: ?It failed because the liability was not mine. The liability of Mr. Smith was not for work done in my house.? When contacted by last night, Mr. Barbosa said: ?Mr. Dill never contracted me. It was Mr. Smith,? but added that he did not plan to take any further action. When asked about the situation, Mr. Dill said he had told Supreme Court what happened, and he had nothing more to add.

United Bermuda Party Deputy Opposition Leader Michael Dunkley ? who made the BHC scandal public during a speech in the House in March 2002 ? said of the apparently conflicting evidence: ?If you testify in court, you testify under oath. You can?t allow a situation where people flip the court off with a hand and change their tune. There?s a perception building in the community that justice rarely gets done.?

A Bermuda Police spokesman declined to comment.