hi all
We've entered into preliminary talks with a builder (we paid $1000 for site investigation, design and estimate fee). The house we've chosen is a standard builders plan (with variation). It is a new design but there is no proper drawings, in fact hardly any information at all (all we have is a very rudimentary floor plan). This hasn't aided our decision making process.
After our initial meeting to receive a 'preliminary quotation' we instructed the cs manager to give us a further itemization of costs for additions to the house we had made (we received lump sum figures of $40 000 for instance) and we also requested quotes for several other items.
Several months later (yup 2 to be precise)we received a revised 'quotation'..still omitting breakdowns and incomplete quotes. Speaking to the CS rep I informed them we needed more information regarding the big ticket items (ie- kitchen, air con, windows). And that I was waiting for a quote from an external airconditioning company that was to get plans from this builder (which i found out later was still waiting for plans from this builder!). Only several days later I receive yet another 'quotation' still incomplete. This time informing me that if we were to make any further 'changes' a 500 administrative cost would be charged!
At this stage we have absolutely no contract with this building company. All we want to know are clear costs. However worded a 'preliminary quotation' is a building contract. Thus needs to clearly state the particulars required. Suddenly Imposing a further 'administrative cost' and informing us that any changes required furthermore can be done in a post contract variation, sounds somewhat coercive and flouting the Fair Trading Act of Unconscionable Conduct.
What do you think? This hardly seems like normal preliminary contract practice.
Does this sound fair to you??