Tom tries to sell his Aston-Martin to Victoria for $12,000. Tom tells Victoria, "I paid $12,000 for the car in 1978 and it's worth twice that today." Tom really paid $8,000 for the car in 1978. If Victoria buys the car, basing her decision on Tom's statement, which of the following correctly states the situation?

A) Tom's statements amount to puffing only.
B) Tom's statements provide grounds to set the contract aside.
C) Tom's statements are actionable only if intentional.
D) Tom's statements amount to fraud in the execution.

Question

Shay-La Winns · Accepted Answer

Final Answer : B, Explanation :  Tom's false statement about the original purchase price to persuade Victoria to buy the car at a specific price can be considered a material misrepresentation, providing grounds to set the contract aside if Victoria relies on this misinformation in her decision to purchase the car.

Definitions

Learning Objectives

Learning Objectives

Related questions