A company contracted with a builder to construct a new corporate building for a fixed price of $$100$ million. At the time of the contract, the price for the required structural steel was $$6$ million but before work began on the project, a fuel shortage increased that price by $20\%.$ The parties then verbally agreed to increase the project price to $$101$ million. After completion of the building, the company paid the builder $$100$ million but refused to pay the additional $$1$ million. If the builder sues the company for $$1$ million, is the builder likely to prevail?

Yes, because the company's promise was supported by consideration.

$$No$,$ because there was no consideration for the modification of the contract.

$$No$,$ because the modification was never reduced to a writing signed by the party to be charged.

$$Yes$,$ because the modification was fair and equitable in view of the unanticipated increase in the price of structural steel.