Question: Barbara Bestdressed ordered an $80 dress from Superabundance Departmen

Question

Question:

Barbara Bestdressed ordered an $80 dress from Superabundance Department Store. The store delivered the dress. Barbara opened the box in the presence of the deliveryman and inspected it. It was light blue-just what she had ordered-so she told him that she accepted it. Later that day, she discovered a tiny hole. What rights, if any, does she have against the store?

Chapter 26 Notes: This chapter deals with the obligations imposed by Article 2 of the UCC on both the buyer and the seller, if nothing is said to the contrary in a contract. First, there is imposed on both parties an obligation to act in good faith regarding contacts under the UCC (1-203). In addition, there is an obligation imposed on both parties to not do anything to make the other party think that you will not perform under the contact as agreed (2-609). This obligation can actually serve as somewhat of a remedy although technically there has been no breach. If one party has reasonable grounds to think the other is not going to perform, they may make a written request for adequate assurance and until they receive it may suspend their own performance. For example, if you have contracted to deliver goods on credit next week and you hear the buyer is having financial difficulties, you might request that he put some of the purchase price into an escrow account and if he does not, you might refuse to deliver. Without this section, you would be in breach if you did not deliver because they have not breached the agreement. The UCC also creates mutual implied concurrent conditions for both parties. They are found in 2-511 and 2-507. The buyer must tender the purchase price before the seller is obligated to tender the goods and the seller must tender the goods before the buyer is obligated to tender the purchase price. If these were not expressed as conditions, the non-breaching party would still have to perform in order to file suit against the other party because the law will normally not help a breaching party even if the other party breached first. By expressing these as conditions, the party who is willing to perform never has an obligation to do so if the other party has not carried out their part of the bargain. The seller’s primary obligation is to tender conforming goods (2-503). If the goods are tendered and do not conform, the seller may have a right to cure under 2-508. If the tine for performance has not yet expired, the right to cure is automatic. If the time for performance has expired, the seller only has a right of cure if he reasonably thought the goods were conforming at the time of tender. The code also provides that if there is nothing in the contract, delivery is at the seller’s place of business (2-308) and at a reasonable time (2-309). When the goods are tendered, the buyer has two options: he may accept or reject. He can only reject rightfully if the goods are non-conforming. He may inspect the goods to ascertain this (2513). If he rightfully rejects, he has no further obligation regarding the goods except to hold them for the seller (2-602). If he does nothing, the goods are deemed to be accepted (2-606). Once there is acceptance, then the buyer is obligated to pay the contract price (2-607). If the goods later are found to be defective (after acceptance), the buyer once again has 2 options: he may sue for breach under 2-607(3)(a) or try to revoke his acceptance under 2-608. The buyer would normally prefer the latter because the practical effect of revocation is that you return the goods and get your money back. If you sue for breach, you keep the defective goods and get reimbursed for the diminution in value. However, 2-608 can be difficult to use sometimes. It requires that the buyer meet 4 elements in order to use it. First, they must show a good reason why they accepted defective goods in the first place instead of just rejecting them. Usually this is because the defect was difficult to discover. Second, the buyer must show that the defect is substantial. If a tiny hole in a dress is not substantial, the buyer may not be able to revoke which would mean that they could not get their money back. Third, the buyer must revoke before there is any substantial change in the goods not caused by the defect. For example, if you were trying to revoke your acceptance of an automobile, which was not performing properly, if you had put a number of miles on it before the defect showed up, you would not be able to revoke. Lastly, the buyer must notify the seller of the defect before he can revoke. If the buyer fails on any of these four items, he cannot revoke his acceptance. That does not mean he does not have any recourse, it means he must keep the goods and sue for the difference between what he paid (contract price) and what the goods are worth with a defect (market price)

Explanation / Answer

As given in the above case Barbara had ordered a dress from Superabundance Department Store, it was delivered and was inspected by her in front of the delivery person, where she found it in good condition and accepted it. Later she found out a tiny hole in the dress.

In the above-given situation, Barbara does not have any right to sue for breach under 2-607(3)(a) or try to revoke his acceptance under 2-608. Here there are two instances, firstly Barbara had inspected it in front of a deliveryman and accepted it by paying the obligatory agreed amount and secondly the hole is tiny which is not the considerate amount to sue for breach under 2-607(3)(a) or try to revoke his acceptance under 2-608.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse Q
• Subjects

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