Efficient Banking Machines (EBM) was a manufacturer of automated teller machines

Question

Efficient Banking Machines (EBM) was a manufacturer of automated teller machines. On July 20, 2010 at 3:30 pm, EBM mailed a letter to Harrisonburg National Bank offering to sell certain equipment for $1,100,000. The letter concluded, “We must know your answer by July 24th. Otherwise, we will have to sell to another bank.” EBM’s letter was received by Harrisonburg by regular mail at 2:30 pm on July 22nd. At 4:30 pm on July 22nd, Harrisonburg mailed a letter to EBM in which it said it would buy the equipment for $1,000,000. This letter was delayed in the mail and was received by EBM on July 25th at 9:30 am. On July 23rd, EBM changed its mind and at 9:00 am the same day mailed a letter to Harrisonburg stating that EBM had sold the equipment to a third party. This letter reached Harrisonburg on July 24th at 10:00am. On July 23rd at 2:00 pm, Harrisonburg sent EBM an email stating, “Ignore our letter. We accept your offer of July 20th.” This email normally would have reached EBM within minutes, but due to telecommunications problems, it did not reach EBM until July 24th at 11:00 am. Is this contract required to be written? Was there a contract? Explain fully why or why not! Discuss all of the communications between the parties.

Explanation / Answer

1) Is this contract required to be written?

No! there is no need of this kind of contract to be written, because all the communication is done in written form already, if there had been no complications n the communication and there had been a deal made then there was no need of contract in writting, and in case of disputes the e-mails would have been presented as proofs of the agreement.

2) Was there a contract?

No! there was no contract, because in this case the most basic and crucial aspect is missing, that is clear communication.A contract is a proposal made by one party and accepted by other, this can be done both orally and in written form. A contract is legally binded agreement, where both parties are of sound mind and know there end of the deal. In this case both the parties could no communicate clearly and that is the reason that no ne can be held responsible because this does not qualify as a contract.

3) Discuss all of the communication between the parties.

Both the parties sent two mail, had one of the parties' mail had reached on time, there would have been contract made and deal done. EBM  sent there first mail to Harrisonburgon july 20th giving a deadline of july 24th, Harrisonburgon replied on july 22nd but this mail did not get delivered till july 25th ( if this mail had have received by EBM this would have been a contract), on 23rd july Harrisonburgon sent a mail to cancle the order but that mail reached EBM on 24th july by then EBM had already sent a mail to Harrisonburgon on 23rd july that they have changed their mind have decided to sell the product to third party.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse E
• Subjects

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