A LAND EXCHANGE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXX, Issue 9, 28 August 1914, Page 6

A LAND EXCHANGE.

CLAIM FOR COMMISSION. At the Court this morning H. P. H. Graves claimed from Joseph Speight, the sum of £93, being commission on hn exchange of.land. Mr Stanford appeared for plaintiff, and Mr A. H. Johnstone for defendant. ' '!' ■ ’ ' • ■'-i •,

Herbert Philip Henry jGraves, licensed land agent, Hawera, the plaintiff, gave evidence that he met defendant for the first time towards the end of 1911. Between then and February 1912 witness took from defendant .written authority to sell his property the authority being on one of the firm’s forms. The details of the property were entered in the authority book. It was his habit to at once enter' l details in the authority hook as soon as the authority was received. The authority was-filed away and was constantly being referred to in the ‘ course of negotiations for sale. On one occassion- the'authority was taken round to Grant, another land agent, 1 so that he could take details from it. Since that the authority could not be found. In February 1912,' witness first wrote to defendant regarding a proposed exchange of his property. Nothing came of that, and no deal resulted from a Te Puke farmer who was shown over the property. From then until Octol>er, 1913, four other unsuccessful attempts were made to sell the property. On October 2nd, 1913, witness wrote to defendant in reference to a proposed exchange with Higgins. On October 7th, Speight telegraphed that he was satisfied with fTie deal. Speight came to Hawera and met the agent for Higgins (Fred Cowan) in witness’ office, Cowan describing the property. Commission of 2i per cent, was fixed, on the assumption that Speight’s land would fetch £45 per acre. Speight also said ho would require to raise a loan on the land he would acquire, and ho offered a bonus of £4O for the raising of the loan. Witness told Speight that personally he had no moans of financing clients, but said ho had every confidence that Cowan would make tho necessary arrangements. On October 14th, Higgins inspected tho farm and said he would he prepared to deal on a basis of £4O an acre. On October 16tli, Avitness motored Speight and bis son to Stratford and Cowan motored them out to Higgins’ farm at Makahu. Speight, Lis son, Higgins and Fred and Win. Cowan met witness in his office at Hawera in tho evening. Speight and his son expressed themselves as satisfied with Higgins’ farm, and witness wrote out an agreement for exchange, which was subsequently completed. Afterwards witness endeavored to raise a loan for Speight, hut was unsuccessful. On October 31st Speight placed tho matter of raising a loan in tho hands of Mr W. G. Malone.

Cross-examined: Witness did not got details of Speight’s property from Hr Hamerton. Speight clearly sot out that ho would require a loan of £SOO in order to deal with Biggins. At the beginning there was an impression that Biggins’ land was unencumbered. The area of Biggins’ farm was 3GO acres. Speight made an offer of £4O for the raising of tho loan. Witness was sure that tho arrangement was not for a commission of £l5O to cover the exchange and the raising of the loan. Witness made several unsuccessful attempts to raise the loan. He knew that the want of the money was embarrassing Speight. Witness offered Mr Malono £2O to get the loan, but

this offer and another of £4O was unsuccessful. Witness would not say that it was unreasonable to expect to raise £SOO at G per cent, for G years ! on a second mortgage of leasehold 1 land—one always tried to do the best possible and it was hard to say what money might bo available. On December 12th, Speight wrote to witness stating that he could not pay what was due to witness, owing to the delay in raising the loan. Bpeight offered to settle up at once when the loan was raised. . On December 23rd Mr Fookes wrote to witness stating that Speight intended to hold witness to an undertaking to raise the loan. In tho present case it was much easier to deal by exchange than by cash sale. Cash sales were very rare in tho district. Witness had had two during the season. Witness valued Speight’s land at £35 as a basis for a. cash sale. It was generally admitted among land agents that they inflated the value of the land on both sides—it was necessary to do it in order to be px-epared for the other side doing the same. It was a. more difficult operation to arrange an ox-i change thaxx to make a cash sale, but ( in the case of poor land it was often the only way of getting rid of it. Speight was given “hopes” that a loan would bo raised, Cowan saying that he could often get a loan where nobody else could. An offer of £4O procuration fee for a. loan was not out of the way—sometimes £IOO was offered if the money was badly wanted.

Re-examined: The attitude throughout in reference to the loan was that Speight looked to witness to raise the loan, witness did his best to do so, but gave no undertaking to get it.

Mr Stanford: If you could raise the loan to-day for Speight you would do

Witness: Oh, yes. Mr Johnstone: If the loan was raised we would pay Graves. Frederick John Cowan, land salesman, Hawera, gave evidence that acted for Higgins. Cross-examined: It was more common for land to be sold for cash than by exchange. In the past, season no had only arranged about four exchanges and about forty cash sales. Athol Grant, land agent, Hawera, gave evidence that he had seen a form of authority signed by Speight, authorising Graves to sell Speight’s propervy. Graves brought the authority along to witness and asked if witness could make any suggestions: of properties which might be exchanged for Speight’s. 1 Witness could not say Whether tho authority was returned to, Graves or riot. 1 i: .. < ; :<■■/. i' Opening his 'clientls case ; after, the luncheon adjournment Mr Johnstope quoted a number of authorities. ,Ho applidd for a mon-suit on i the ground that there was a; special contract, tfiat it was still open and unperformed, and that consequently plaintiff was not entitled to recover until performance had been made. Hefenclant, Joseph Speight, gave evidence that he was presently resident at Makahu, but formerly lived at Kakaramea; The first time: witness kaHvl Graves was'one timq; when ho called andsuggested :that , ; witness should exchange hisi Kakarapiea Jarm for a’ house and land in Palmerston. At the interview before tho agree-i merit to exchange was i made Graves said lib had nb doubt that a loan could be raised ' and Mr W. Cowan; said fie) borild often get a loan when nobody else could. Witness : impressed on; Graves that all his capital was sunkj in'his land and that if the exchange took place it would bo absolutely necessary for him to raise more capital by ivay of loan. Witness objected that CllO was too much commission, even at 2i per cent, on £45 per acre, and that the .bonus for the loan was too large; but as he felt that ho could make the farm pay if he had tho money he made no real objection. This was all the evidence called for tho defence. After hearing addresses by counsel the S.M .said he thought tho case would rest to a largo extent on the large amount of documentary evidence put in. He thought that the Land Agents’ Act woulej need to be amended in the direction of making it obligatory for the rate of interest to lie stated when the authority to sell was signed. Judgment was reserved..