On January 5, Amy wrote a letter to Benny offering to sell her van for $160,000. Amy stated in the letter that Benny had to reply by January 15 or she might sell to someone else. On receiving the letter in Jan 8, Benny immediately sent a letter to Amy asking whether she would accept payment by installment over six months. Benny received no reply from Amy and then posted another letter to Amy accepting her offer on Jan 14. As Amy thought that Benny did not accept her offer, she sold her van to Cat on January 16. Amy finally received Benny’s letter of acceptance on January 17. Advise Amy.
Pls answer in paragraph or by point form in details. Thanks!
2007-06-05 06:22:13 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Should you have posted this question in the "homework help" section instead?
2007-06-05 06:32:13 · answer #1 · answered by kaisergirl 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are a whole bunch of issues here-- is this a final exam question? If so, please please please don't cheat... learn it yourself.
If not, here are some issues:
(1) Mailbox rule -- when acceptances are effective -- upon mailing or upon receipt?
(2) OPTION -- note that Amy offered to keep an option open to purchase the van -- but could the option be revoked because it was not supported by consideration?
(3) "Perfect tender rule" -- usually requires that acceptance be the exact terms as the offer, or otherwise it's considered a rejection and counteroffer. So, normally, the accepting party can't change her mind and say that the offeror was bound to the original terms. BUT we have an option here -- does the option stay open after there's been a counteroffer?
(4) Note that this is a van -- which may constitute "goods" under the Uniform Commercial Code. How do the UCC's "Perfect Tender," "Option" and "Mailbox" rules differ from those at common law?
Lots of stuff to think about there. And answers I don't know off the top of my head. But there are a few issues for you to ponder.
2007-06-05 14:16:36 · answer #2 · answered by Perdendosi 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think the mailbox rule is applicable here.
I think that Benny's first letter represented a counter-offer and therefore a rejection of Amy's offer.
Think of it this way: A offers to sell Widget to B for $8. B responds, "Will you take $6?" A doesn't respond. B then says, "OK, I'll pay $8." My understanding is that A is under no obligation to accept the $8 at that point.
2007-06-05 14:09:18 · answer #3 · answered by dcdc1211 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The selling offer was to be withdrawn at the end of Jan 15.
Amy sold the van on the Jan 16
Amy didnot recieve Benny'y acceptance till Jan 17.
Amy is in the right, morally, legally, ethically.
2007-06-05 14:21:07 · answer #4 · answered by reinformer 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am not going to answer this question for you. However, I suggest you look up the Mailbox Rule. Also, refresh yourself on what a Counter Offer is. Look up Option Contracts, and also address the Statute of Frauds. That should give you a good basis for answering this question.
2007-06-05 13:46:01 · answer #5 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Open your book and look up "Mailbox Rule."
Hint: Unless otherwise specified in the offer, an acceptance is effective upon dispatch.
2007-06-05 13:37:00 · answer #6 · answered by Mr Placid 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋