Marissa was interested in buying a used motorcycle from Victor, her regular mech

Question

Marissa was interested in buying a used motorcycle from Victor, her regular mechanic. He told her that the engine on the motorcycle was in good shape. Marissa then entered into a written contract with Victor in which she would pay Victor 2,500 for the motorcycle. Marissa was going out of town on vacation, so they agreed that when she returned in a week, she would pay Victor and pick up the motorcycle. During that week, the manufacturer notified Victor that the motorcycle was being recalled because it had a faulty engine. Victor said nothing about the condition of the engine or the Marissa came to pick up the motorcycle. They chatted about other matters; she gave him the $2,500, and took the motorcycle. Later, Marissa started having problems with the motorcycle and found out that Victor and other initial purchasers had been notified of the issue with the engine. She asked for a refund, accusing Victor of fraud. Victor refused on the basis that he did not make any misrepresentation. Who is correct and why? recall when s. Jason is excited because a developer plans a subdivision full of high-priced homes that will adjoin his property, and Jason believes that the subdivision will significantly increase the value of his property. Jason is so pleased that he puts in a new swimming pool to celebrate. However, the developer changes his mind and decides not to develop the subdivision. Jason is angry and asks if he can sue the developer, particularly since he can establish reliance. What would you tell Jason and

Explanation / Answer

Answer 4:-

Marissa is correct because Victor has clearly committed beach of trust and fraud. In the given scenario it was duty of Victor to have communicated about the call being received from manufacturer of engine of the faulty engine.

However just because he want to go through with the deal he concealed the fact from Marissa. Hence Marissa can clearly go to court on this ground and have her money refunded.

Answer 5:-

Jason is not correct and cannot sue the developer because the decision or thinking that because of subdivision coming up adjoining his property is out of his own belief and we was never induced by the developer.

Developer is justified in his decision to change his mind and not to go ahead with developing the subdivision in that area as he may consider it prudent.

Hence Jason has no recourse on the developer.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse M
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.