BUS205 Module 3 Case
What is the Uniform Commercial Code and how doers it govern the sale of goods in general?
The Uniform Commercial Code is a guideline created by different states in United States of America as a model statute. It was established in order to reinforce an agreement between the laws directing sales and various business arrangements made by other states. It is very vital to come into agreement with the state law due to the measurements of business deals that are made beyond the state borders. The Uniform Commercial Code ensures that there is uniformity in business laws as well as enabling the states to be more flexible in fulfilling the local business status. This is achieved through carrying out changes of the Uniform Commercial Code’s message as established in every state. Generally, the Uniform Commercial Code focuses on the transactions of personal property but not those of real property. It is also very vital in resolving contract conflicts that may occur in the process of selling products. Nevertheless, the conflicts arising over the sales of products are under the guidance of a section of the Uniform Commercial Code. However, most sections in the business laws under this system control a separate type of business deals.
On the other hand, research shows that a sale is the process where the products are transferred from a seller to the consumer for a given fee. For instance, an item becomes a good when it can be touched or felt and moved. Therefore, putting a house on sale is not tangible due to the incapability of a house to move. Buying a computer machine from an electronics store and selling a bus to another person are examples of a purchase and sale of products and services. The code’s provisions demand that some sales of products are supposed to be in a written form for them to be legally accepted. This is especially when the product’s price is estimated to be over $500 and thus the contracts have to be in written form (Robert, 2009). Generally, the code is under the governance of tender, acceptance, rejection, and revocation. This implies that a consumer is likely to reject a product in case it does not meet the standards required. The consumer may still accept the product by giving a warrant to cover the product. In addition, the consumer can still revoke the acceptance of the product in the revocation stage.
Identify and explain the applicable Uniform Commercial Code sections relative to Zabriskie Chevrolet, Inc. v. Smith, 240 A.2d 195(1968)
The case involving Zabriskie demonstrates the stage of rejection where he bought a car, a 1966 Chevrolet Biscayne, and paid for it using a cheque. After leaving with the new car, he experienced some problems on the way as he was driving the car, therefore, he had to return where he had bought the car and ordered the cheque not to be banked. However, the seller went ahead and banked the cheque because he was sure that the consumer would not reject the car since the car had been tested and proved perfect before being handed over to the buyer. The court demonstrated later that the customer had the right to enjoy his new car as a way of checking whether the car was working properly as he had been told.
Therefore, the customer had the permission of not taking the new car under the dictates of the Uniform Commercial Code (Carter, 2006). Nevertheless, the seller lacks protection unless he has better reasons to accept the view that the products would be taken. Therefore, due to the rejection of the goods, the transaction is thus cancelled although a remedy is not advisable with regards to the Code. This case showed that there was completely no forced breach on the side of the consumer. Hence, the article illustrates that the buyer had two remedies as he was making a non-conforming tender. These remedies include revocation, which shows that this is a real lemon case. Under the Uniform Commercial Code, the consumer has the right to rescind his or her approval of the product. “Since quality is key, and manufacturers are competing based on their warranties, the buyer is always assured that any nonconformity he does discover will be remedied” (Carter, 2006).
The details of the Uniform Commercial Code and the “lemon laws”
A good number of state lemon laws demonstrate that sellers are supposed to refund or replace a defective new vehicle at the time when the problem cannot be fixed after performing about four to five trials. They are also supposed to give a safety defect after performing not more than two attempts or, in case the vehicle has been taken out of service for one full month, within ten to twenty thousand miles (Nordstrom, 1990). State lemon could be achieved by maintaining excellent records, offering correct notice, and applying the necessary programs concerning the subject where necessary. The Uniform Commercial Code on the other hand was established in order to give consistency in the process of transactions that are encountered daily in more than one state. It seeks to clear out the differences experienced during the transaction processes by giving those conducting interstate transactions with similar rules countrywide.
The Uniform Commercial Code is known to be a group of guidelines that were created to provide protection to business. Therefore, the public policy considerations that support the decision in the Zabriskie case and other cases like it may involve the remedy that states that after acceptance, a consumer is required to inform the manufacturer of any breach within a reasonable time when he realizes the presence of the breach or he will not be allowed any remedy. A remedy would involve revocation of acceptance. This is only achieved when the consumer gives a notice in time before revoking acceptance. Therefore, the buyer’s remedy is supposed to be balanced against commercial fairness to the manufacturer.
Carter, C. (2006). Consumer warranty law: lemon law, Magnuson-Moss, UCC, mobile home, and other warranty statutes, with CD-ROM. New York, NY: National Consumer Law Center.
Nordstrom, R. (1990). Handbook of the law of sales. Charleston, WV: West Pub. Co.
Robert, J. (2009). American law register, Volume 22. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.