BUILDING OF A HOUSE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVIII, Issue 17846, 29 July 1921, Page 3

BUILDING OF A HOUSE.

CLAIM FOR COMMISSION. CASE FOR THE DEFENCE. The case in which G. A. Jones, builder (Mr. Towle), claimed from G. H. M&icalfe. solicitor (Mr. Inder). £110 19s, alleged to be due on a building contract,, was continued before Mr. W. R. McKeaa, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesfcirday. The defendant counter-claimed "for £200, damages, alleged to have been incurred by the excessive cost of the building, a house in brick. Plaintiff alleged that h& was engaged on a basis of per cent . and he estimated the cost would be about £2500. The actual cost was £3271, but ■ the deiendant refused to pay plaintiff commission beyond £2500, cJa'inur.g that a warranty was given that, the ct7?t would not exceed that sum. The counter-chum was made on the grounds that the Diligence of plaintiff had increased the cost j and that the large cost affected the sel i ling value of the property, and embarrassed defendant in his financial arrangements. Th_e defendant, in evidence, said ho received an estimate that the lions*- in wood would cost £2000. Tenders we called, the lowest being £2699, and he decided not to go on. Subsequently ho instructed his architects to get in touch with the plaintiff, who stated at an iutei-view that he could build the house in brick for £2500. Dtfc fendant told plaintiff about the tenders for construction in wood, and plaintiff said he could nut understand how th« pnees were arrived at, aaid that the tenderers must have been profiteering. Flaintiff said he would require a commission of 12j per cent., and defendant subsequently told luui he would accept his stated prco. The building was then proceeded with, and it was not until December, shoi tiy before U was completed, that, h<> had any inkling that estimate of £250' would be exceeded. The actual cost of the workdone by plaintiff was £3271, on which plaintiff" claimed £400 odd as commission, and in addition, the electric installation cost £93, architects' ajnounted to £160. and the cost of the land was £710, making a total of £4654. Cross examined, defendant said h«. gathered from plaintiff that his outsido price was £2500. exclusive of his commission. He did not see any necessity for asking him for a definite tender. ■ B. C. Cbilwell, architect, gave o ulenee regarding negotiations with plaintiff. Ho said plaintiff subsequently admitted he had guessed his estimate of £2500. In reply to Mr. Towle, witness said he did not "know until December what tb& total cost would be. Raymond Sheath, land agent and valuer, said a fair market value of the house was £4200. A. H. Dunn, lar,d agent and formerly an architect, estimated the selling value at about £4000, valuing the house at' £2WX), and the section at. £700. Lawrence Bater, plasterer, said plaintiff told him while the work was in progress that the house would cost £2500, and later. that the cost, would be under £3000. The case was then adjo-urned until next week.