Legal Question....

[shhak]

This seems pretty cut and dried to me, but since I got a letter from this guys attorney (or at least one he's consulted with), I just have to ask.

My family and I own a used car/truck/travel trailer lot. We mainly deal in travel trailers, but have a regular used car dealers license.

About 2 months ago we took a $500 deposit on a $6500 travel trailer. The guy was supposed to go to his bank and get the rest of the money and pick it up within a week or so. We have signs printed and posted on at least 4 different locations through out the office stating that if you leave a deposit on a trailer, make sure you want that trailer because deposits will not be returned.

About 2 weeks ago we hadn't heard anything from the guy, so we called him to see if he stilled intended to purchase the trailer. He said he'd had trouble getting it financed but he'd come down the next day to pay another $2000 or so and possibly even pay the balance.

Well, he walks in and says that he can't get it financed so he's going to have to "forfeit his deposit". In the same sentence he says "so can I get my deposit back?" I thought forfeit meant "FORFEIT..."
We tell him that we don't return deposits. After all, what's the point in taking a deposit if you're just going to return it anyway? He got completely stupid telling us how he was going to close us down, burn our building, etc etc etc.

Today we get a letter from an attorny. He says that "to his understanding, we had a verbal agreement with (can't remember his name) that if he couldn't get financing, we'd return his deposit". We don't tell people that. And to avoid legal action we must return his $500 within x amount of days...

My question is this: are we really required to give him his deposit back? I mean, hell, I watched Judge Judy enough to know what I THINK is the answer, but what's the opinion of the SVTP LEO's?

 

[SID297]

What does the written purchase agreement you surely had him sign read?

 

[FordSVTFan]

What does the written purchase agreement you surely had him sign read?

Ding, Ding, Ding, we have a winner.

Your signs will make no difference if there isnt acknowledgment of the contract they are attempting to impose.

Call it a wash and offer the guy back $250.

 

[fiveohpoepoe]

"He got completely stupid telling us how he was going to close us down, burn our building", etc etc etc.

Any witnesses to this? That is a criminal offense. If yes to the witnesses, reply back to that atty and see if he would like to discuss that with his client. Id bet his atty would charge more than $500 to represent him for a criminal matter

 

[RDJ]

Personally I would also check and be sure the letter was from a real attorney. it is not unknown for some clown to get one of this friends to pretend to be an attorney in an effort to get money back they know full well that they are not entitled to.

 

[Lt. ZO6]

Personally I would also check and be sure the letter was from a real attorney. it is not unknown for some clown to get one of this friends to pretend to be an attorney in an effort to get money back they know full well that they are not entitled to.

You can also pay an attorney a small fee to draft the letter only.

 

[shhak]

When we take a deposit, we just do a purchase order stating the make/model and VIN of the vehicle, price and the amount paid down. He then signs that and we each keep a copy.

Is it common practice anywhere for people to return deposits? I wouldn't have even had the guts to ask for it back myself. The point of a deposit is to basically put a hold on that vehicle so that person can get the rest of the money to buy it. If I were just going to return it, would there really be any point in getting one to begin with?

Also, I had a couple other people interested in that camper, but nobody had put any money down on it. After he put a deposit on it, I had to tell those people that it was sold. So basically, I lost a sale (actually 2 sales on the same camper) because that clown couldnt' get his money.

 

[mr_malina]

When we take a deposit, we just do a purchase order stating the make/model and VIN of the vehicle, price and the amount paid down. He then signs that and we each keep a copy.

Is it common practice anywhere for people to return deposits? I wouldn't have even had the guts to ask for it back myself. The point of a deposit is to basically put a hold on that vehicle so that person can get the rest of the money to buy it. If I were just going to return it, would there really be any point in getting one to begin with?

Also, I had a couple other people interested in that camper, but nobody had put any money down on it. After he put a deposit on it, I had to tell those people that it was sold. So basically, I lost a sale (actually 2 sales on the same camper) because that clown couldnt' get his money.

I wouldn't worry about it, long as your paperwork confirms what you are saying and he signed it you are good.

 

[04HillzGT]

If it's in writing and he signed it then it's a done deal. Courts will not take a subsequent oral statement as a modification to a written contract unless there is new consideration for that promise. Secondly, "what he thought" doesn't mean anything, unless he can prove he signed the agreement under some sort of duress or that you had superior bargaining power there's nothing he can do. Worst part is he made it more expensive for himself by having an attorney draft a letter, either its a good friend or they do a lot of business because no attorney or potential attorney in my case would do it for free. Funny, if he paid the attorney to draft it wouldn't that just exacerbate the fact that he didn't have the money to buy the trailer?

 

[FordSVTFan]

If it's in writing and he signed it then it's a done deal. Courts will not take a subsequent oral statement as a modification to a written contract unless there is new consideration for that promise.

Unless the document is not a fully integrated writing, or has ambiguous terms that are open to interpretation.

 

[04HillzGT]

that's true but the court has a wide margin to decide if the argued terms are integrated or not. If the term is vague they'll try to figure it out using the plain meaning reading of the K or the trade's meaning of "forfeiture." Honestly I think unless the defendant can show duress he won't get off, the court will not want to award him damages just because he had an opportunity but failed to read the document. If they decide it is integrated they are going to bar any subsequent oral modifications using the parole evidence rule.

 

[SID297]

Unless the document is not a fully integrated writing, or has ambiguous terms that are open to interpretation.

In which case any ambiguities will be construed most strongly against the party who created the document.

 

[FordSVTFan]

that's true but the court has a wide margin to decide if the argued terms are integrated or not. If the term is vague they'll try to figure it out using the plain meaning reading of the K or the trade's meaning of "forfeiture." Honestly I think unless the defendant can show duress he won't get off, the court will not want to award him damages just because he had an opportunity but failed to read the document. If they decide it is integrated they are going to bar any subsequent oral modifications using the parole evidence rule.

Ah to be an idealistic 1L. Your presumptions are not based in actual courtroom experience. Court often is the "Any Given Sunday" rule.

In which case any ambiguities will be construed most strongly against the party who created the document.

So true, which is the OP.