BUYER WANTS TO PAY £10,500 FOR THE RICHMOND HOTEL

Greymouth Evening Star, 25 July 1947, Page 6

BUYER WANTS TO PAY £10,500 FOR THE RICHMOND HOTEL

No figures relating to turnover or profit were presented in evidence when the sale of the Richmond Hotel, Greymouth, by W. Newsome to Mrs I. E' Coffey, for £10,500 —the amount for which it was bought about two years ago—was considered by the Westland and Sales Committee at Greymouth this morning. The only testimony given to the committee was that of Mr L. P. Coffey, son of the prospective purchaser, who indicated the willingness of his mother to complete the sale at the figure sought. When counsel, Mr C. R. McGinley, said that the only evidence he proposed to call was that of Mr Coffey who would refer to the willingness of the prospective buyer to pay £10,500, the chairman of the committee (Mr M. Wallace) commented that such a statement would “cut no ice” with him. The committee, he said, was formed to fix the correct value of properties. “Would a lower figure not be acceptable?” he asked. “There would be no sale in that case,” replied Mr McGinley. Evidence of Son

“We are quite satisfied to buy the Richmond hotel for the price asked.” said Mr Coffey in evidence. He pointed out that his mother had had considerable experience with hotels and added that he had made the inquiries regarding the prospects of purchasing the property, being told then that the vendor was prepared to sell at the amount he had paid to obtain it.

••Have you had-access to any figures or returns from this hotel?” asked the chairman. “I have seen some figures,” replied witness. In answer to a question by Mr J. Mulcare. a member of the committee, he said that even if the business of the hotel was lagging somewhat, he considered that his mother and he could restore it. Goodwill Question

“You will be taking the goodwill with you,” said Mr Mulcare. “You don’t want to pay do you, for something you will be taking with you?” asked the chairman. “You know that the business is nothing like it was when this man took over?” asked Mr J. W. Greenslade the witness replying that he did know. . After Mr McGinley had discussed the position with the committee, the hearing was adjourned.