Bond and Spear orally agreed that Bond would buy a car from Spear for $475. Bond paid Spear a $100 deposit. The next day, Spear received an offer of $575, the car's fair market value. Spear immediately notified Bond that Spear would not sell the car to Bond and returned Bond's $100. If Bond sues Spear and Spear defends on the basis of the statute of frauds, Bond will probably:
A.
lose, because the agreement was for less than the fair market value of the car.
B.
win, because the agreement was for less than $500.
C.
lose, because the agreement was not in writing and signed by Spear.
Incorrect D.
win, because Bond paid a deposit.
You answered D. The correct answer is B.
If Bond (the buyer) sues Spear (the seller), Bond will probably win because the agreement was for less than $500. Since this problem deals with the sale of goods (here, a car), the Uniform Commercial Code's Statute of Frauds would be applicable. If the sale of a good involves an amount of $500 or more, then a writing is required to have an enforceable agreement. However, the amount involved in this case was only $475. Therefore, the disputant, Bond, does not need to have a writing to sue for breach of contract. Under the facts of the case, they reached an oral agreement, and the buyer gave the seller a $100 deposit. When the seller received a higher offer, the seller breached the contract by refusing to sell the car to Bond. There is sufficient evidence in the fact that the seller accepted the deposit to prove that they had a valid and enforceable oral agreement.
lets say that Bond didn't pay Spear the $100 deposit would it still be an enforceable contract and Bond would win?
.