CLAIM FOR COMMISSION

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2100, 7 June 1907, Page 4

CLAIM FOR COMMISSION

SALE OE A HOUSE

llenry Currie proceeded ngninst J. C. Aickin nfc the Magistrate's Court yesterday, to roeovor £3O, borne; 2J per cent, commission on tlio safo of a property oil Kaiti, valued at £I2OO.

Hr. W. L. Boos appeared for plain till', and stated tlint in May plaintiff was employed to sell tlio property and went, to oxponso and trouble, and took a Mr. Marshall over it in Juno. Mr. Chilton was also shown over it and deposited .tit). Two and a-luill per cent, commission on £I2OO, tho value of tlio property, was sued lor. Homy Currie, plaintiff, said lie received instructions from Aitkin to sell bis property on Kaiti at £I2OO, and reooivo the usual commission. Aicliin showed his tit.lo and gave Instructions. Mr. Marshall, schoolmaster at' Makaraku, saw tlio property on 23rd Juno, being driven over to it by witness. Told Aickin that Marshall was a probable buyer. Ho was quite willing that Marshall should tafco it. Tho latter did not take flic property, as ho was not appointed to tho Kaiti school. IVont to Mr. Chilton on 17th November, who wished to invest. Two days later ho saw tho property and gave a deposit of £lO, saying it would suit him. Identified tho receipt produced. Told defendant the same evening that be received tho deposit. Ho then said that ho had given an option to sell to Mr. Buscke during that month. Witness said his instructions had never been cancelled. Aickin said that witness should not have I sold tho property, but should have brought the buyer to him. He also said that if Buscke did not sell the proporty boforo tho end of the month they could fall back on Mr Chilton. Aickin said ho fully intended to explain the new arrangement to witness, but had forgotten it. Requostcd Aickin to refund Chilton’s deposit'. Suggested settlement by arbitration to defendant, but received no reply, and instituted proceedings. By Mr. Stock: As far as his recollection went he was to soil for £I2OO, not merely to introduce a buyer. Aickin said the agreement was signed by Mr. Bull, but it should have been signed by Mrs. Bull. He had instructions to sell, nevertheless. Defendant did not say that no salo was to be effected without his sanction. If Aickin or his wifo sold it bofore witness did, the latter was to receive no commission. After paying the deposit, Chilton told witness that tlioro was an option to Buscke. When witness told Aickin of his sale, the latter said that he had no right to sell. Did not suggest that £lO be offered Buscke to forego his claim. Aickin did not.' say that no salo could be effected without Bull’s consent. Said to Mrs. Aickin that the property was worth nothing to them unless the deed was signed by Mrs. Bull. Had it' on Aickin’s word that he could fix it at any time. Did not toll Mrs. Aickin that “Bull can sell you up if he liked.” She did not say that witness had no right to sell. Re-examined by Mr. Rees: Aickin stated that Buscke had the option of finding a buyor by the end of the month. John Marshall, schoolmaster at Matawhero, deposed that he saw Currie about the property on Kaiti and viewed it. Had somo idea of purchasing whether he got the mastership of the Kaiti school or not. Richard. Stephen Chilton, fruiterer, stated that' he met Currie in regard to the property in question, and saw it on 10th November. Mrs. Aickin showed him round the place. Saw plaintiff afterwards, saying he thought it would stii; him. Gave him a deposit of £lO. Saw Aickin who said he could get it if Buscke did not dispose of it 1. the end of the month. Said he wanted his deposit back or the property. Aickin replied that he could have tho deposit back any time, and ultimately witness received it. By Mr. Stock: Mrs. Aickin said she thought the property was under offer to someone. She could not give the name. She referred him to her husband or Currie. Admitted saying that a “bird in tho hand was worth two in the bush.” Subsequently Currie informed witness that there was somo misunderstanding. Mr. Stock asked that plaintiff be non-suited, as Currie had no authority to effect a salo. Defendant had iio clear title, and he could not instruct an agent to sell when he would rendor himself liable to damages. His Worship decided to hear the evidence.

James Carlyle Aickin, defendant’, deposed that in May, 1906, he told Currie that if lie introduced a buyer for his property, ho would give the usual commission. Said ho was not quite certain of his title, and ex-

plained that Mr. Bull, who had signed tho memorandum of lease, had not informed him that the property was in his wife’s name. Witness would have to consult Mr. Bull before a sale could bo effected. At the same time, informed him that it was in another agent’s bands, and that he had been trying himself to sell it. Currie advised witness that Mr. Marshall was a prospective buyer. Saw plaintiff on 19th November, who said lie had sold the property. Witness said ho could not accept the sale as ho had given a month’s option to Busoke. He then asked for a statement of his position. It meant that' Chilton could go to Bilscko and get the property from him. Witness said in that case he could give Currie a commission as Busdke would give him tho full £I2OO. Currie seemed satisfied with that, and that ho would sec about it in the morning. Was certain that Currie had no right to complete a sale. A purchaser was to be referred to witness.

By Mr. Rees: The property was sold for £I2OO, less the cost of transfer from Bull. There were previous agents, but they had no authority to sell, only to introduce. Currie was to receive an equivalent for commission if Chilton bought the place. Mrs. Aickin, wife of previous witness, said they were talking about cutting the place up. Plaintiff was present, and she said to him “There’s your chance,” and he was to find a buyer, and if witness and her husband concluded a sale he would receive the usual commission. On one occasion, Currie asked about the title, and when told it was not signed, he said that they had no more claim to the property than he had. Defendant said they thought Mr. Bull’s word was sufficient, and Currie said he would not trust anyone so far as money was concerned. Chilton was shown through the house, and witness told him that someone had an option for a month. Currie told them that he had completed the sale and witness said ho had no right to sell it.

At 12.30 the Court adjourned till 2 p.m. for the attendance of Mr. Busclce, who was required for the production of the agreement between himself and Aickin. , When tho court resumed Mr. Stock said he had secured the agreement allowing Busckc to sell. He said it was absurd that Aickin would make an arrangement with Currie, when lie knew that his title was not good. Mr. Rees hold that the evidence suported plaintiff’s claim. It was unreasonable that an agent would advertise tho sale, without proper authority. It was a case of avoiding payment of a commission, and that was not fair.

His Worship decided to reserve judgment.