HOW THEY BUILT THEIR HOUSE

New Zealand Times, Volume LIV, Issue 12648, 7 January 1927, Page 11

HOW THEY BUILT THEIR HOUSE

THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN MUGGINS AND BUNGLE When two parties have decided to enter into a contract with one another they usually put the matter down in writing so that there shall be no mistake as to their intentions. This document, called the “agreement” or the “memorandum of agreement,” would really be quite superfluous if the parties to it could mutually trust one another and perfectly understood each other’s wants; but unfortunately even in these enlightened days such happy conditions are not often met. We must leave them till that time when the lion shall lie down with the lamb. Not that we would suggest that the average client and the average builder (or even Mr Muggins and Mr Bungle) could either of them be compared to lions and lambs: they are more to he compared, to two dogs of different breeds who. meeting casually, begin in plnv and end 'with fighting. Well, to proceed with this agreement between Messrs Muggins and Bungle, as we have before indicated,

it was not a very happy one; indeed “disagreement” would be a more suitable term for it. It, was legal enough n as far as it bound Mr Bungle to build a house and bound Mr Muggins to pay a certain sum therefor; but there was not. sufficient detail as to the manner in which Mr Bungle should perform his contract or at what times Mr Muggins should pav him for his work. The registered architect uses a printed set of conditions "of contract compiled by many persons and the result of many , years of experience. These are attached to the agreement and are mentioned in it, and therefore become part of the contract just as the drawings and specifications do. Furthermore. these “General Conditions of Contract” having been approved by both architects’ and builders’ representative bodies, have become a standard of general practice in regard to the carrying out of building contracts. This being so, it is often unnecessary to have recourse to the powers therein contained, and consequently building contracts can be worked more smoothly when based on such a well-accepted standard. Some of the provisions of these conditions (for which there was no allowance, in the Muggins-Bungle “disagreement”) are as follow: 1. That for completion of contract there was a verbal understanding only that Mr Bungle would, complete the cottage in two months, or sooner if possible—it took him actually 10 weeks, and then Mr Muggins moved ,in before it was really fit and ready. 2. Instalments or progress payments as the work proceeds; the proportion being 75 per cent, of the work done. Again there was only a verbal arrangement that Mr Muggins was to let Mr Bungle have the instalments of the loan as they were granted. This resulted in Mr Bungle being paid his amounts Tather spasmodically. Sometimes there was too little; then he grumbled and Mr Muggins paid up some of his own cash and rather overdid it. Towards the end there was too much advanced and Mr Bungle did not of course grumble then; he just went slow because he was starting another job. Finally, there was not enough balance to make Mr Bungle want to hurry up and finish the work. 3. Provision for maintenance. The •conditions lay down a certain period during which the contractor has to maintain the building in good condition—the maximum, three months, ' is the usual period and five per cent. of the; money is held over till then. Mr Bungle verbally agreed to look after the building up to one month after i completion, but there was no provision for money to be retained. 4. The conditions make definite pro! visions in the caso of dispute regarding any matter under the contract; as the specification in numerous places stated that such and suoh a thing was to be “clone in an approved manner” or some material was to be “the best,” wlieri it came to a dispute there was no one except the two parties to the contract who could deal with the matter; it was a question of invoking the law.

5. The conditions make certain provisions for the payment of fees for building permits, of insurance premiums and other items by the builder. Mr Bungle came to Mr Muggins for these and explained that'he, as owner, would need to pay them. As Mr Muggins did not know much about the matter, rather than fall out, with Mr Bungle early in the contract, he paid out. .

6. There is definite provision in the conditions regarding the vexed questi6n of extra works, or variations. A contract is a contract and each party is entitled in the strict leading of the law to havo his part of it exactly performed ; but a building is a rather complex thing to contract for. and it is safe to say that hardly ever is a building carried out exactly to inten-' tinn ; thero is always some slight variation. verv frequently them are ex■is and- less frequently deductions. Now. what happens in a “water-tight”

contract when variations are made by one party without a fresh agreement on the matter? The contract may be made void. This seldom happens in such cases, for it is to be the interest, of both parties that it shall not .boj made void, but nevertheless it is the’ cause of much needless, wrangling, compromise and bargaining—neither party being the gainer, unless one is weak. A,s Mr Muggins and Mr Bungle had nothing in writing about these things Mr . Bungle waived aside Mr Muggins’s request for the cost by saying, “That is all right. I will put it in for what it costs me. I don’t expect to make anything on these small items.” But judging hy his final account, he did not intend to lose. So, it is clear that for want of definite conditions and a properly drawn-up contract, with a third party to act as a sort of umpire or referee, Mr Muggins paid more for his house th in he had intended, and Mr Bungle hod some most worrying experiences in getting what he thought was duo to him. As Mr Level. Rule puts it. he has secured a very inferior, badl vdesigned cottage- at a cost of aboyt £l2O more than the sum for which he might have had a better one built. “And then,” he adds, “he comes tme as 4 Inst—not a first—resort, and asks me to pull him out of the. mire as chennlv as possible.” That is the irony of it 1