WOMAN'S SERIOUS ALLEGATION

NZ Truth, Issue 1293, 18 September 1930, Page 2

WOMAN'S SERIOUS ALLEGATION

STOPPED WORK \ i 1

FROM MEMORY

MRS. BUNN DECLARES HER SIGNATURE TO AGREEMENT WAS FORGED

CONTRACTOR SAYS IT IS GENUINE (From "N.Z. Truth's" Balciutha Representative.) Allegations that John Bedford Earle, building" contractor of Clydevale, had "rung m" an agreement purporting to bear her signature, but which was not m fact the one she had signed, were made by Mrs. Anna Elizabeth Bunn at the Balciutha Magistrate's Court, when Earle sued her for £232, claimed as balance of account on a building and alteration job. Mr. H. J. Dixon, S.M., reserved his decision.

EARLE was represented by Mr. J. L. Walter, while Mr. G. T. Kelly appeared for Mrs. Bunn. Outlining the case for Earle, Mr. Walter' said that as a result of a conversation with Bunn, his client m October last went up to Mrs. Bunn's house at Rongahere,. where he discussed with her certain additions and alterations which she required doing. According to Mr. Walter, it was agreed that the price for the additions should be £300. Mrs. Bunn was not certain exactly as to what alterations she wanted done, and it was not convenient or possible for Earle to' estimate for those until he should have the new portion erected, so that question was allowed to remain m abeyance. Earle, continued Mr. Walter, put the matter into writing m the kitchen of Mrs. Bunn's house at once, and signed it, as did she. He gave her a copy and took the signed one away with him. This was produced m court. ■ ' In April, just be- ' fore the alterations were completed Earle had reasor to inform Mrs Bunn that a considerable sum, over and above the £300, was due for those extras. She replied that everything was included m the original contract price of £300 and ordered him to stop work. Earle, concluded counsel, had received a. progress payment of £ 150, a further sum of £100, and £50 had heen paid into court. He now claimed for the balance, £232, less what had been paid m. Evidence along these lines was given by Earle, who said he wrote out an agreement relating to the additions to the house and got Mrs. Bunn to sign it as authority to purchase material. It transpired m court the agreement was not stamped; and Earle explained this by saying he only needed it as authority to proceed. Mr. Walter said he would have the matter promptly attended to. The document was signed by both of them, swore Earle, before Bunn returned to the house from working on the farm,, and no one else, was present. He was unable to say if. the son saw it then or not. „'.:•■' After the framework of the additions had been erected, said Earle, Mrs. Bunn told him of several alterations to the old portioft which she required, and he started on them. As Mrs. Bunn was continually telling him she did not want the job to cost too much, he thought he had better tell her that the extras were mounting up. She promptly claimed they were all included.! m the £300 estimate.

He told her. to look at her copy of the agreement, but she said she had not got one. "I said to her,'.' went on Earle, "•That's funny; I sent 1 you one,' and told her the extras amounted to £200. I was then told to stop work and did so." ' - / * Six weeks later he made a claim m writing for the balance, and had made many efforts to get a settlement before taking this action. His costs for material alone, receipts being produced, was £312, To Mr.' Kelly, Earle said he could not recollect Mrs. Bunn, at the original ; meeting, ' being very anxious to fix a pi'lce. She wanted an all-in quotation, but he could not give one, as he did not know what alterations she I wanted. [ Mr. Kelly: You wrote out the agre'e- | ment on paper ' supplied by her? — I .think so. I used- my own pen to sign, with. Did she sign immediately after j'ou? !' — Yes, I am positive of that. Do you remember Mrs. Bunn saying she only had £300 to spend? — No. When Mr, Bunn arrived, according to you, you had both signed? — Yes. Did he know that? — I don't know. You swear the agreement produced to-vday is the one you both signed? — I do. " / You know they allege it is not? — They can say what they like, I know it is. ■ \ • ) Did you^ supply specifications? — I supplied a set which contained everything as far as I had been told what was wanted. Do you know, that they are lost, Mrs. Bunn says since you last handled them? — I gave them back to her. You got a progress payment of £150?— Yes. How far had you gone then? — I had got the new part all up, but had done very little of the alterations,

SON'S STATEMENT

taken on the job at all, except at daily wages and with the Bunns purchasing the materials. That concluded the plaintiff's case, and Mr. Kelly opened the defence by saying that naturally the chief matter of importance to Mrs. Bunn was how much she could afford to spend on the job. By carefully working things out, she found she could manage £300, and" she would say she got a rough estimate for that amount from Earle. "She claims," said counsel, "she did not sign that agreement till her son had read it, as he did all her business for her. She also claims that the agreement produced is a forgery and not the one she signed." The wording of the receipt for the progress payment, added Mr. Kelly, was strange m view of Earle's claim that the alterations were not included m his estimate. It ran, "Received £150 on account for additions and alterations." \ Ernest George Bunn was the first '. witness, and he was absolutely positive _ his mother signed nothing until he iiad read the agree - ' ment. He was equally positive that- the one produced m court was not the one she signed, nor was the signature hers. He detailed his attempts ! to get Earle to complete the work and said he had himself helped m some of it. He agreed that the windows m the job were to be 10 guineas extra, but that -was the only additional payment he authorised. Several other alterations were done, but Earle, who knew he transacted all business for his mother, never mentioned additional costs to him. It was not until he was away on his honeymoon that his mother was told by Earle the extras were mounting. When' he did see the agreement produced he said it looked like his mother's signature, but did not 1 identify it as such. TO' Mr. Walter, Bunn said that after the trouble started he was still prepared to pay Earle for materials used and give him day wages, m fairness to him, as he, witness, -considered Earle had under-estimated the cost. Earle refused the offer and started the present action. He did' not suggest the wording of the. receipt to Earle. ' Mr. Kelly: If Earle contracted for £300, why did he not complain when he had exceeded that sum? — Contractors tell me they must take losses if they make them. You will admit the work done is worth more than £3"00? — Yes, it is worth a bit more than that. I still offer day Avages. Mrs. Bunn corroborated her son's evidence about the signature, and said she Ayas, positive everything was included m the £300. She^was certain, 1 because the figure was £275 plus £25 for hot ancl cold water system. She received a bill of £172 for "extras." Mrs. Bunn was asked to write her signature, both with her son's pen and a court one. > She said she never realised the job would cost more than £300. Two bank officers, Albert Victor Taylor and Richard Dineen. who said their work led to their knowing a good deal about handwriting, both alleged that the^ signature on the agreement produced was different from Mrs; Bunn's ordinary one. From enlarged photographs put m by James Webster, they demonstrated the alleged differences. Taylor said he might have passed a cheque- bearing the alleged signature, but Dineen was positive he would query' it. . George Booth and William Hutch - ings, contractors, both estimated the cost of Earle's completed work at about £410- and said they would make money at that figure. After they had, been cross-examined on the value of separate portions, the magistrate reserved his decision.

"Was Mrs. Bunn very surprised when you told her . the "extras" would cost more? — Yes, she at once disputed it. When she told you she had no copy of the agreement, you sent her another. Why did you not let her see the original? — I don't know; I suppose I d'd not want to let it out of my hands. -' How did you , make a copy of the specifications if you only made one set to start with? — I did it from memory. Did not Mrs. Bunn say when she saw this copy that it was not the same as ; the original, but merely' contained work you had done? — Nothing of the kind; I'll swear to it. When Bunn saw you later, did he mention he ' did not think the agreement bore his mother's own signature?! — I can't remember, but he may have j done. , . "In reply to further questions by Mr. Keljy, Earle said he had never told Bunn the extras were mounting up. He* claimed to have done many years' contracting and always to have made a profit. Re-examined, he was quite definite nothing was said at the time of signing to indicate the £300 included everything. Mr. Dixon, S.M.: Did Mrs. B.unn use your pen to sign with? — I have an idea she did, but could not swear to it. Two othter building' contractors, Alexander Littlejohn and Alec Arm* strong Jones, both said they considei'ed the work done by Earle was competently put up and estimated its cost at £600. Jones said he would not 'have