Wang orally agreed to sell a thoroughbred horse to Presti for $60,000. When Pres
ID: 1163606 • Letter: W
Question
Wang orally agreed to sell a thoroughbred horse to Presti for $60,000. When Presti sent a check in payment, Want told him that he intended to hold the check for a month for tax purpose. Want retained passion of the horse. While the check remained uncashed, a disagreement arose between Wang and Presti. Wang announced that he would not go through with the transaction and that, since the contract was oral, it was unenforceable. Presti claimed that his sending the check was payment and this action mad the oral contract valid and enforceable. Wang denied accepting payment Is Presti’s claim, that sending the check make the contract enforceable? Why or why not?
NOTE: Extend the discussion. Do not simply restate what has already been said.
Explanation / Answer
Answer : No, Presti's sending check of $60,000 to Wang for horse selling is not enforcing the oral contract to be valid. Because $60,000 is the income of Wang and also in this $60,000 sale tax may included. Now if the tax department investigate about this $60,000 to Wang then Wang will be unable to show any valid reason for this $60,000. If Wang show Presti's sent check for this $60,000 then this also will create problem to both Presti and Wang because in check anywhere it is not mentioned that for which reason Presti give this $60,000 to Wang. As a result, the tax department may doubt on both Presti and Wang that both of them are related with illegal business. Therefore, as Presti's sending check is not mentioning for which reason $60,000 is sent to Wang, Presti's claim is not enforcable for oral contract.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.