MONEY-MAKING

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 29, 4 February 1914, Page 3

MONEY-MAKING

" STRANGELY INGENIOUS METHODS" MAGISTRATE AND LAND AGENTS (B? TELEGMPH— SPtCHL TO THB POST.) AUCKLAND, This Day. Light was thrown upon the details of a land speculation in the case of Frederick W. Manning (for whom Mr. J. E. Prendergast appeared) v. Chas. E. Major (represented by Mr. W. Vallance) which was heard at the Magistrate's Court before Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M. The claim was for £97 3s 6d, alleged to be the defendant's share of the expenses of a land deal in which both parties were concerned^ The circumstances, according U> the evidence of the plaintiff, were that in July, 1912, the defendant, a land agent, brought under his notice a property of 19,000 acres at Rotorua, which was for sale at 6s per acre. The defendant suggested that they should join in purchasing the property, stating that it could be turned over within a short period at a large profit. After'consideration witness agreed and paid a deposit of £100 himself, as the defendant was then short of cash. A rough agreement was drawn up in which, he claimed, the defendant undertook to find half the purchase money and expenses. The property was immediately placed in an agent's hands for resale, the price of 9s per acre being fixed. On 6th September, 1912, the vendors of the land were ready to settle, the amount payable by the parties being £1952. _ Defendant asked witness to advance his share of the amount, as he could not raise the sum at the time. Witness refused, and together they went to the bank, and Major endeavoured to raise an overdraft for the amount, but failed, and witness then paid the whole/ sum. The title to the property was ''taken out in witness's name. The agreement was that Major should pay his share as soon as he could. The .defendant's evidence was to the effect that when he could not find the required money a new arrangement was entered into by which Manning was to take the whole of the liability, but if witness could sell the property within six months he (Major) should get half the profits. | Mr. Kettle : So if it turned out trumps you were to be in ; if not you were to be Out. , I Mr. Vallance pointed out that this agreement was subject to the land being sold at not less than 9s per acre. Mr. Kettle, after making reference to the complicated nature of the case, and to the unfortunate .circumstance that the agreements had not been drawn up j clearly in legal fashion, asked Mr. PrenI dergast why his client had not takeii the whole matter to the Supreme Court. If the defendant was liable for one part of the sum involved, he was liable for the whole amount. Even if he did . give judgment for, the expenses further litigation would probably be necessary. Charles M'Masters, land salesman, stated that he could have obtained 9s per acre for the property from a syndicate. The plaintiff put a price of 10s on it. Mr. Kettle : Who Was your syndicate? Witness: I was arranging one. Mr. Kettle: Then you could not have sold it for 9s. You are trying to mislead me, trifling with my intelligence. You only imagined you could sell the land at the price. E. G. Pegler, the agent through whom the land was bought, was put"in the'b'o'x at the' request of Mr. Kettle, who examined him as to the transactions over the land prior to the deal in question, Witness said that he had procured an option of 5s 6d an acre on the property. Mr. Kettle : And you asked 6s for it from the parties in this case. Is it a. fair thing? Witness said that the whole matter was complicated. j Mr. Kettle : But don't you see how ' wrong it is? Witness : I believe the buyers knew > that I had this option. Mr. Kettle: Did you tell them? Witness : No. It was finally agreed that the case should stand /over for a week to allow Mr. Prendergast to consider Mr. Kettle's suggestion that the. action should^ be removed to the Supreme Court. His Worship remarked that it was the most extraordinary'land transaction he had ever come across. Land agents appeared to have strangely ingenious methods of making money by means of options and sub-optioiis and syndicates.