Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ9
They entered into a bilateral contract not a unilateral contract; there was no misunderstanding. The intent, was to start at a price and let market inflate the asking price; which unfortunately did not happen. Furthermore, many states follow the Uniform Commercial Code, for which merchants are held to a different tier of verbal/written requirements over what determines and triggers a contract to become binding. Sorry, but negotiations between a consumer and merchant are much different than your example of a civil contract between spouses.
|
Sure, no doubt that is often the case. But I'm fairly certain that requirements for binding don't include ones over the internet with no good faith exchanges. I think you'll find that even if the dealer was being purposely sleazy, there is little legal recourse.
And I think you misunderstood my post regarding spouses. One spouse can break a contract that the other signed regarding contracting. So, you might with full knowledge hire someone to put in windows in your house, but your wife could nullify the contract even though she isn't a signatory, and that would be JUST LIKE HER, ALWAYS MEDDLING!
But it was an example as proof of laws looking to protect those involved or even affected by the contract.
Our argument was regarding the "moral basis" of laws. And those are there to protect both buyer and seller.