A builder and a wealthy landowner entered into a written contract whereby the builder would build on the grounds of the landowner's estate a mausoleum, using imported Italian granite, to hold the remains of the landowner's recently deceased wife. The cost of the mausoleum was set at $100,000. After the contract was signed but before construction began, the builder learned that an unforeseen embargo prevented him from getting the granite he planned to use to build the mausoleum. He could get the granite from another source, but it would cost an additional $25,000. The builder explained the situation to the landowner, who agreed to pay $125,000 to have the mausoleum built. The builder prepared a writing stating that the price for the mausoleum was now $125,000. Both the builder and the landowner signed the writing. After the work was completed, the landowner gave the builder a certified check for $100,000 and refused to pay one penny more. If the builder brings suit against the landowner to recover the additional $25,000, will the builder likely prevail?A Yes, because the modification was fair and equitable in view of the unanticipated increase in the cost of granite. B Yes, because the later agreement was in writing and signed by the parties. C No, because the builder had a preexisting duty to do the work for $100,000.D No, because the 25% increase in price that the builder was trying to force on the landowner is unconscionable.