Evidence library · Call 3 of 6
Affordable Modular Buildings partnership introduced
Source date: 4 July 2026 · Conversation summary
Alex’s summary of the conversation. Statements remain attributed to the participants.
On this call Tim Austin asked to speak to the family's lawyer and discussed agreeing a scope of work with a proper contract.
Affordable Modular Buildings partnership introduced
On this call Tim Austin asked to speak to the family's lawyer and discussed agreeing a scope of work with a proper contract.
Alex, Kay's daughter and authorised representative. Sarah, Expandify (Expander Dwellings Pty Ltd). Tim Austin, Affordable Modular Buildings.
Alex’s summary of the conversation
What happened in this conversation
Alex’s account of the issues discussed, with later comparisons and related written evidence labelled separately.
Tim's position on Alex's solicitor was the opposite of what it later became:
On this call Tim asked to speak to Kay’s lawyer, said he could see why Alex had taken that path, and discussed agreeing a scope of work with a proper contract. Five days later, he warned Alex that pursuing legal action would hold up the project, although he also suggested retaining the solicitor on the side Alex & Tim Austin · legal action and contract concerns · 9 July. Five weeks after this introductory call, he said having a legal person involved exposed him to risk and asked Alex to pull back her solicitor as a precondition of work continuing Alex & Tim Austin · withdrawal and payment dispute · 12 August.
The buildings were still in China:
Sarah confirmed the buildings were still in China waiting for their departure date. On 8 June Clayton had said the booking was being placed that week, with arrival mid-July and foundations in the first week of July. The buildings had not shipped and foundations had not begun; the mid-July arrival forecast was still ahead of the call date.
Affordable Modular Buildings was taking over installation for all Expandify clients:
Sarah’s stated reason was capacity: Tim had a much bigger team that could manage the builds more efficiently than Expandify could at its current size.
Tim confirmed Expandify remained the contracting party:
Asked directly whether Expandify still needed to be in the conversation, Tim confirmed that it did and described the mechanism as an amendment to the existing contract.
Tim cited different customer and project figures on different dates:
In Alex’s account, Tim referred to 166 active clients and 40 Expandify clients on 4 July, then 21 builds, 22 Expandify clients and 188 total clients in August [Kay & Tim Austin · payment pressure · 11 August signed account, Alex & Tim Austin · withdrawal and payment dispute · 12 August]. The figures may describe different categories at different dates; the record does not establish a like-for-like comparison.
Alex described the intended housing arrangement:
Alex confirmed Kay could no longer stay with Alex’s sister and would be moving in with Alex for the next few months. The timeline had kept changing.
Source limitations
Authored account; statements are not independent proof of their underlying facts.