Source:  Timber and Wood Working Machinery, xii 17
Date:  23 August 1890
Place:  London

PLUCKROSE, GEORGE, and OLDREY, HENRY, builders and contractors, Carlton Bridge, Westbourne Park; Crown Works, Bosworth Road, and Cowley Wharf, Kensal Road. These debtors presented their own petition on the 12th July, and now attended the first meeting of their creditors, Mr. E. Leadem Hough, Official Receiver, presiding. A considerable time was devoted to the reading over of the proofs, of which a large number had been tendered. The Chairman next stated that as the debtors had only that day lodged the statement of their affairs, he had been unable to furnish the creditors with the usual summary and observations. The accounts showed liabilities of £4,810 expected to rank against the estate, while the assets were valued at £4,820 9s. 9d., after allowing for payment of preferential claims for £108 5s. 11d., thus showing an apparent surplus of £18 odd. It was possible that the amount provable against the estate would be increased, inasmuch as some two or three creditors on the joint estate held securities on the separate estates. The debtors had a contract in hand from which, when completed, it was estimated some £1,400 surplus would be derived. The debtors had had fifteen or sixteen judgments made against them, and in two or three instances they had entered defence to the actions. The chief action was one commenced by the widow of a man named Wain, for compensation on the death of her husband by the fall of a house in Great Tichfield Street. The result of that action was that the builders and architect were held to be equally liable, and damages to the amount of £250 were awarded to Mrs. Wain. Seven other actions were dependent upon that one, and a motion had been set down for a new trial. An action was pending against Mr. J. A. Mitchell, of Great Castle Street, in respect of a balance due on a final certificate for work done at Great Tichfield Street, the amount claimed being £435, less £150 paid on account. That action had yet to be heard. The debtors attributed their insolvency to the pressure of creditors, to their inability to get money due to them on the contracts, to a loss of £1,500 on the building at Great Tichfield Street and to the several actions for compensation in connection with the falling of the house in that street. Mr. Oldrey had no separate liabilities, and with regard to assets, stated that the furniture at his private house was the property of his wife, it having been purchased by her separate money within three months of the marriage. He was entitled to one-fourth share in the equities of certain properties under the will of his father, but was unable to give any estimate of the value of such share, which was charged to the extent of nearly £700. Mr. Pluckrose had separate debts of £120 and disposed of his furniture last May, devoting the proceeds to his personal and household expenditure. The furniture and effects at his residence had been supplied on the hire purchase system. — Mr. Street (Ward, Perks and McKay) said he attended on behalf of creditors. It appeared to him that the most serious part of the case was the claims that would be made against the estate in respect of the Tichfield Street accident. Could the chairman give the meeting any information as to the probable amount of those claims. Upon referring to the statement of affairs, the Chairman said, no reference to any such claims was made upon the front sheet, from which he had quoted the figures relating to the liabilities and assets. Turning to sheet D, however, he found further liabilities amounting to over £4,300, and it appeared they had reference to the claims in result of the accident. — Mr. Broad (a creditor): Will it be necessary to keep the estate open until those claims are decided. Cannot we close the estate at once and divide the spoil among the present trade creditors? (Laughter.) — The Chairman replied that of course the case could not be disposed of in that summary fashion. — Mr. Street said that he understood judgment had been given in the test case, and the other actions no doubt would be governed by that decision — A creditor: Then there is a risk of the liabilities being doubled. — The Chairman: That appears to be the position of affairs, so far as can be seen at present. I take it that no offer is forthcoming under the circumstances. — Mr. Tadman, who appeared for the debtors, said his clients were unable to submit any offer, but would place themselves unreservedly in the hands of the meeting. — The Chairman announced that Mr. R. J. Ward of Bloomsbury Mansions, Hart Street, had been appointed as special manager of the estate. That gentleman had reported upon the existing contracts, and had recommended that certain of them should be carried to completion. The next business before the meeting was to pass a resolution for bankruptcy and appoint a trustee and committee of inspection. — Mr. Lavender, representing Messrs. Farmiloe and Sons, thereupon moved that an adjudication be applied for to wind up the estate in bankruptcy, and that Mr. Ward be appointed as trustee under the proceedings. — Mr. Houghton seconded the resolution, which was carried without dissent, . and subsequently Mr. Lavender, Mr. Houghton and Mr. R. Barrett were elected as the committee of inspection to assist the trustee in the administration of the estate. — The following are among the principal creditors: