Last month, Mr Saxton (53), was forced to watch as the house bus he had bought just an hour earlier went up in flames on State Highway 85, about halfway between Alexandra and Chatto Creek.
And now he is locked in a dispute with the Dunedin City Council over an $880 bill he believes should be refunded.
Mr Saxton (53), a wharfie at Port Otago, had planned to build a garage on a vacant coastal section he owned at Osborne, near Dunedin.
The garage was to be used as a base while developing his property, and in September he contracted Versatile Buildings in Dunedin to do the work, he said.
However, plans for the garage were abandoned on November 17 after the Dunedin City Council's building control team objected, saying they suspected he would live in the garage and therefore it needed extra features, he said.
The features - including a kitchen, bathroom, double-glazing and a sealed driveway - would have inflated the cost from an estimated $19,000 to "$24,000 or $26,000", and drawn higher consent fees to be paid to the council, he said.
Instead, Mr Saxton withdrew his plans and borrowed money to buy the house bus for $16,500, intending to park it on his section.
He bought the 1963 Leyland Leopard in Cromwell on November 23 and was driving it back to Dunedin later the same day when smoke began pouring from the back of the vehicle, turning into a fire which - without a functioning fire extinguisher on board - quickly consumed the bus.
However, asked to refund Mr Saxton's consent fee for the garage project by Versatile Buildings staff, the council "coldly dismissed it out of hand", Mr Saxton said.
Instead, two weeks ago Mr Saxton received cheques from the council totalling $738 - less than half the original $1614 fee he paid to the council through Versatile Buildings, he said.
The loss of the bus and the dispute over the garage and partial refund came as Mr Saxton also faced the possibility of losing his job at Port Otago, he said.
Borrowing money for the house bus, which was not insured, had also set back his plans to develop his property by several years.
Council staff argued they were entitled to keep the remaining $880 to cover the cost of work they had already carried out in processing his consent application, he said.
However, Versatile Buildings agreed to refund his entire $250 deposit and also presented Mr Saxton with a cheque for $300, raised by a staff collection.
The company's "amazing act of kindness" was in stark contrast to the council's approach, which appeared to lack compassion in the Christmas holiday period, Mr Saxton told the Otago Daily Times yesterday.
"I was absolutely blown away and overwhelmed.
"These are just normal people giving me money, and here's the council making it difficult all the way through.
"What a . . . contrast."
"I think in my case they [the council] could have bent the rules and it would have been absolutely marvellous goodwill," he said.
However, council chief building control officer Neil McLeod defended the decision to offer only a partial refund, saying the council began incurring costs as soon as the first paperwork was received.
Building consent fees were divided into administration and processing costs and the cost of staff conducting site inspections, he said.
The council would "generally" refund site inspection fees if a building consent application was withdrawn, but not the other fees, he said.
"Once we accept the application the works starts immediately and certainly there's cost incurred by the council."
While he was not familiar with the details of Mr Saxton's case, it appeared there had been prolonged contact between him and the council, therefore involving work by council staff, Mr McLeod said.
"As a general rule you are never going to get all your money back, because the council will have incurred costs," he said.
