Marissa was interested in buying a used personal watercraft from Victor. He told her that the engine on the watercraft was in good shape. Marissa agreed to pay Victor $4,000 for the watercraft. Marissa was going out of town on vacation, so they agreed that when she returned in a week, she would pay Victor and pick up the watercraft. During that week, the manufacturer notified Victor that the watercraft was being recalled because it had a faulty engine. Victor said nothing about the condition of the engine or the recall when Marissa came to pick up the watercraft. They chatted about other matters; she gave him the $4,000, and took the watercraft. Later, Marissa started having problems with the watercraft and found out that Victor and other initial purchasers had been notified of the issue with the engine. She asked for a refund, accusing Victor of fraud. Victor refused on the basis that he did not make any misrepresentation. Who is correct and why? For purposes of this question, assume that sales talk or puffery is not at issue.

Question

Davotrick Dotrey · Accepted Answer

Final Answer : Marissa is correct. Courts will find nondisclosure as having the same legal effect as an actual false assertion when there is a failure to correct assertions of fact that are no longer true in light of events that occurred since the initial consent to the terms of the agreement.

Definitions

Learning Objectives

Learning Objectives

Related questions