Car purchase... did I have a contract?
 

Reader's Digest version:
Found a car on Craigslist. I'm 1.5 hours away. I make an offer based on photos. Seller says he'll take $14,600. I reply "OK... $14600," and proceed to make arrangements to take a shuttle to Tucson to pick up the car tomorrow.

Tonight I get e-mail that the seller went to Carmax and they offered him $15000 so he won't be selling me the car.

Did we have a contract?

IMHO, yes.

Mutual consideration existed.

Technically yes, you had a verbal contract, which if I'm not mistaken can be construed as legally binding, but there's no way it'd hold up in front of a judge. What he did was crappy, but really not illegal, at least not in any practical sense.

You found the value of the sellers charachter. $400. Better not to do business with someone like that. I'd be surprised if the cars condition was fully disclosed.

Good way of putting it Moses. A contract = offer, acceptance, supported by consideration (price). Let it go and move on.

Not a lawyer, but my understanding is offer, acceptance and consideration. You seem to have all three met here, although there's potentially an arguable point that there was no consideration if the seller had reason to believe you weren't good for the funds or something. You almost certainly had a contract, whether or not it could ever be enforceable is a different question.

As a general rule, "if it isn't written down, it doesn't exist". That was a lawyer's advice to me once.

Your offer and his acceptance is not legally binding absent a written agreement. Uniform Commericial Code applies to ALL movable goods. Sorry....seller is still an idiot.....he should have at least asked you to match the other "offer".

Now....there is something called detrimental reliance...but under your facts....it did not occur. Also, consideration would be construed as a down payment of some nature. Not just the meeting of the minds.

Nutshell answer from your friendly counselor.

Best of luck in your search.

I had a huge amount of time in this deal. I will be calling the Carmax buyer just to let him know that when Jason shows up with his 350z that he's all packed up and moving out of town. He'll be stuck with whatever they want to give him.

Not a lawyer, but from what I've gathered by talking to a lawyer family member in the past: you had no contract. A verbal contract isn't worth anything. Exception being if part of the contract has already been fulfilled. Had you given him a deposit, or already paid him for the car (which he hasn't turned over to you, yet), then you might have legal recourse. (Or, conversely, had he already given you the car but you haven't paid, yet--you owe him.) In those situations, despite there not being a written contract, the transactions of money and/or goods/services would not have taken place had there not been some sort of understanding as to what the arrangements would be. Cannot recall the legal term for this. Obviously, technicalities may also differ state-to-state.

You saved $14,600 and wasted some time and a bit of money. And he's an *********. End of story.

As I doubt your going to pursue this legally the contract issue is a moot point. He had an obligation to sell you the car for $14,600. He didn't do it. Sounds like he's a person you don't want to buy a car from anyhow.

I doubt that will work;if he already went through the process, he probably has a contract with Carmax. From their site:

Will make you a written offer good for 7 days, so you can decide what's best for you

http://www.carmax.com/dyn/webuy/WhySell.aspx

http://www.carmax.com/dyn/webuy/webuy.aspx

What he did to you was just as flaky as many used car buyers treat sellers. He probably figured you'd flake out or not show up, and the better deal was a bird in the hand. It's hard to expect people to be serious sight unseen. The honorable thing to do would have been to give you your chance, but most people have little integrity. Must have been a great deal if it was worth $400 more to a dealer on a wholesale basis.

Not defending what he did, but as a guy that's sold a few cars myself, I'd probably have taken the offer from CarMax even if theirs had been $14,600 and yours had been $15,000. CarMax is not going to play games or balk or flake at the last minute. Many private-party buyers do. The "I-just-want-to-be-rid-of-this-thing-TODAY" factor may very well have been worth it to the seller.

Look elsewhere. I know you feel jilted, but 350Z's are dime-a-dozen.

Do you have a cite to the section that purportedly provides that an agreement for the sale of a car must be in writing to be enforceable?

You may have a contract but it will get you nothing since it's basically he said, he/she said.

I was in the process of buying a new Ford truck 3 years ago, deposited $1500 with the dealer and it was on my credit card statement, called 2 days before the pick-up and the idiots said " Gosh, sorry, but we sold your truck.

They made no effort to get me a comparable vehicle, only arranged to refund my deposit in a timely manner. I called Ford Motor Company Corp., customer relations to discuss the situation and they just said " we have no control over our dealers and their actions"

NFW I'm ever buying a Ford vehicle. I have considered going in for a quick test drive of a new Mustang V8 and burn through a set of tires for them though. That is still a very likely option in the future. I think that would temper my frustration.

We had gone back and forth via e-mail. He wrote, "I'll take $14,600." My reply was, "OK - $14,600." I then proceeded to explain the steps I'd be taking and the steps he needed to take to get the deal done.

I have a wholesale license and was very clear to him that I could/would buy the car with no hassles. We exchanged multiple e-mails this week about the deal before he bailed the night before. The frustrating part is that he insisted on cash. I spent an afternoon going to three bank branches to gather up that much. I also had a reservation on a shuttle to get from Phoenix to Tucson. Fortunately I was able to cancel that without having to pay for it.

I feel a little better as he sent an e-mail last night that was very apologetic about the whole thing. At first he was very defiant saying we had no agreement (?).

He should have asked for an immediate deposit. That way he knows you're serious, and you have proof that he has accpeted your offer.

Too late, though.

He did you a big favor. If his integrity is that low, can you imagine what kind of lies he told you about the condition of the car? Move on. I found the best car (IMO) after I got shafted by a jerk in Birmingham AL that backed out on a verbal agreement.
Galatians 6:7 "Be not deceived for God is not mocked, whatever a man sows, that he will also reap" (non-Christians call it Karma).

I agree re phone calls.
We can assume that AZ has implemented the UCC.... I think Louisiana (Napoleonic Code) eventually did too.

I also assume 1.5 hrs away from Phoenix was in the US and in AZ or another UCC state.

For Email - sounds like writing to me - if it was all on Email. You don't want to waste your time in Court on this -- or your money.

And yup he did you a favor - now go find another, better one. These are not rare cars.

where does it say in the UCC that a contract to sell a car must be in writing?

Lee, if you have the e-mails, and they are as you stated you do have a contract. You can sue for enforcement of the contract or for your damages, but in the end it will cost you more in time and trouble than it is worth.

Well, there's the real problem.

It would likely be impossible to sue for enforcement of the contract because the car is probably gone already. The court can't compel the seller to sell to you a car he no longer owns.

And damages - that would be limited to the difference between your deal and the value of the car. Usually not much.

Yep... it would cost me more than I was going to make to prove my point. It's just not worth the effort. I talked to Carmax. They said if he had a number that it was in writing. Oh well. Someday that sort of behavior will catch up with him.

Hi the,

I may be a bit dated in my contract law....not sure where to look...relying on law school on that, and I'm getting a bit old now. haha. And of course, I certainly could be mistaken! BUT, I do know that the UCC WILL apply since there are movable goods involved.

Notwithstanding the necessity of a written contract, there is still no consideration as I see it. Buyer's only cause of action would be an action for Specific Performance, if there is for some reason a contract formed, which I highly doubt.

Also, there are no damages here......buyer is out of pocket for nothing.

Good luck,

I thought offer+acceptance=contract. He said he wanted X for the car. I said OK, X is fine. The consideration (exchange of something of value) is in the contract. I give him money. He gives me the car.

As I read this interpretation I would say we did have a legally binding contract:
http://ledgerism.net/UCCformation.htm

Does the phrase "Beat a dead horse" have any meaning to you?

Lee,

The law provides for countless interpretations. Here, I don't know of one judge that would enforce this agreement. Not without any further surrounding circumstances. Sorry....of course this is just my legal opinion. You may find other opinions that differ....but that's what makes the legal world go round.

Best,

Methinks the seller would prevail based on the statute of frauds since the purchase price was greater than $500.:(

Nobody's beating anything. It's a discussion for the sake of learning a few things.

Doesn't that just say it has to be in writing? I would think that e-mail communications constitutes writing, right? Dang it's been a long time since I had business law classes.

My guess would be that a writing would require a signature or something. Which would raise interesting issues with e-mail communications. Like is a standard "e-mail signature" on the bottom of most e-mails ok? (LOL, kinda).

I'd guess that you would have a problem because even though you sent an e-mail accepting, he didn't sign anything, and didn't do anything arguably in place of signing. Like sending an e-mail back to you saying, "OK, we have a deal. Signed, Joe." That might present an interesting case - would that be considered a high-tech "signature?"

I don't think this is beating a dead horse, this comes up all the time with car guys. If a buyer really wants to lock a seller down, get a SIGNED agreement, with a liquidated damages provision! "Damages would be difficult to determine, so the parties agree that in the event of breach, buyer is entitled to recover $5,000" or something like that.

That would probably work.

I don't think you'll find many people selling cars who would be willing to sign something like that!

Like the earlier comments, the seller probably had some doubts about how serious the buyer really was. Anyone who has sold a car knows you get calls from people who will talk and talk, try to do "negotiations" over the phone, get directions from you and say, "I'll be right over to look at it!" then never show up.

Poor behavior by buyers doesn't justify the seller's behavior in this case, but it is not unreasonable to assume -- based upon my own experiences selling a few cars -- that any "offer" from someone who hasn't actually come out to look at the car yet is just that, an offer and not a contract.