There are 2 different responses below, please response to each in
a 100 word format using scholarly source from the text book “The Legal
Environment of Business.” Please include question ask on both responses.
1. The contract that was presented to Maynard given the legal offer to buy a 1979 Mustang at Pierre Awesome Car Place for $5,000, which Maynard agreed to once he signed the contract, stating a satisfying or mirroring to the term of the offer. A valid contract, is on that is not void but valid when it meets all legal agreement for an enforceable contract.(Argosy University 2014) Maynard does have an argument to have his money refunded because he was told that the brakes and the engine were in tip top shape and they were not. On the other hand, Maynard did sign the contract that had a clause sold “as-is”, but later had mechanical defects, and he ended up having an accident because of the faulty brakes. Even though the clause said, “as-is” Maynard bought it with in mind that the car was “as-is” with brakes and engine was in tip-top shape. Maynard can sue Pierre for the damages of the accident that he had from the faulty brakes. He can also sue for the two weeks of work because he did not have a car to get to work. Furthermore, Maynard can sue for the mental trauma, pain, and suffering. Ethical issue that Maynard may have against Pierre is that he was buying a car in good faith, and Pierre lied to him about the conditions of the car.
2. The contract formed between Pierre's and Maynard could be
valid in some states but in Mass. it’s not. For it to be valid in Mass.
you would have to write on the contract "as is for parts only", but
in Mass we have the lemon law that within thirty days if something goes wrong
with the car the car does pass inspection the person who sold the car have to
give back the money to the buyer. The contract was addresses correctly then no
the owner doesn't have to give money back. Then again it all depends on
what state you are from because they all have different rules on their
cars. If this was a dealership most dealership on a used car give you
thirty days. So the dealer would have to honor that. Maynard has right it
for any reason that the contract was not valid the owner would have to give
back his money in full. The uniform commercial code is what's going on in
your state so you would have to do some looking up so if you go to court you
will have everything that you need. In Mass. "as is" is valid
unless he put "as is for parts only" then Maynard wouldn't be
able to do anything he would be stuck with the car.The damage that Maynard can
get is his money back because of the laws in Mass. But in other states
I'm going to use new Hampshire there isn't a lemon law its sold "as
is" so Maynard would be able to get anything back unless the contract
stated that the brakes and the engine is in good shape. For that reason
is that Maynard didn't really shop around the dealer or buyer saw him coming
and knew it would be an easy sale. When buying a used car you have to do
your homework on it especially if you plan on buying that car. In Mass.
Maynard could get all his money back for the car because of the lemon laws in
mass. Pierre's was very sneaking selling this car to Maynard, he feed him
everything that he wanted to hear and Maynard fell for it, because he wanted
the car so badly. Maynard should had never started off by saying I have
only $4000.00 dollars, Pierre's knew that the cars wasn't worth that much but
he knew someone would come around and buy it. In my opinion he should be
reported for his fraudulent dealership. He also should have written in
the contract everything that he said to Maynard but he didn't. He had a
sale so he figures if I sell it for $4000.00 the other $1000.00 that I
lose well he can get the brakes and whatever else needs to be done.
No comments:
Post a Comment