Footy legend Anthony Koutoufides has responded to allegations of non-payment for the final installment on his family’s multimillion-dollar Ivanhoe residence, sparking a contentious dispute with builders Acustruct.
Koutoufides and his wife, Susie, vehemently deny accusations of payment evasion, insisting they have adhered to legal obligations.
The couple, entangled in a legal battle with Acustruct, alleges inappropriate behaviour and a damaging social media campaign by the builders, triggered by their refusal of an independent inspection before final payment.
“They wouldn’t allow me to get an independent person to come in and inspect the place before final payment, as was my right under the contract,” revealed Carlton great Koutoufides to the Herald Sun.
“Because of that, it has escalated, and I had to engage lawyers. There were a few issues that needed to be attended to and weren’t, and I’m obligated to get an independent person to come in before we move in.”
The Koutoufides assert they are wrongly portrayed as aggressors, with their reputation suffering as other contractors become entangled in the controversy.
Acustruct contends the final payment escalated from $130,000 to over $180,000.
Susie accuses Acustruct of unprofessionalism and trolling despite requests to communicate through legal channels.
Social media posts, including a framed Carlton jersey listed for sale and comments on Anthony’s posts, further fueled the dispute.
Koutoufides, a revered figure with 278 games and a 1995 premiership, enlisted lawyers Olivia Terziovski and Imran Fatah of Boutique Lawyers.
Fatah refutes claims of changed locks, deeming Acustruct’s behavior obstructive to mediation.
He highlights construction delays and numerous defects found by independent experts, characterising Acustruct’s conduct as extreme.
“We are in the process of compiling materials to make a complaint to the regulator, contacting Victoria Police about some threatening conduct from tradies, and are waiting on the reports of the independent experts so they can consider their options in relation to litigation,” said Fatah.
“We are also considering defamation action against Acustruct.”
Acustruct was contacted for comment.
