Biology Forums - Study Force

The office manager of a real estate agency was at an office supply store to replace a filing cabinet when he saw a demonstration of a new Xerox copier. Undoubtedly, the agency would benefit from the copier, especially since it had the capability of enlarging the original-a good feature when dealing with the small print of contracts. The next day, he called the manager of the store to discuss the machine further. The seller said that it was "10 years ahead of the competition," that it "was rated as maintenance-free by an independent consumer research group," and that he had "sold five to other real estate agencies in this area" and "had only one left." The agency, relying on these statements, asked to have it delivered. When it arrived, the office manager had learned that every statement made by the seller had been false; furthermore, the seller did not send out the machine discussed, but the older model. Which of the following is true?

▸ Had the office supply store sent the right model, the agency would have had no remedy.

▸ This is a "buyer beware" situation and the buyer has no remedy.

▸ The agency would have to keep the machine, but could sue the seller for damages for the tort of deceit.

▸ The agency would have a remedy for breach of contract, but no remedy for other statements that merely persuaded it to enter the contract.

▸ The agency could have returned the machine even if it had been the right model, since the remedy of rescission was available to it for misrepresentations made.

Content hidden