Consumer Law, Warranties Contract law - Under who's terms was the contract?

Status
Not open for further replies.

northville07

New Member
Well I have to do a law module and have a case to advise.

The question is "Advise A + B with regard to the relevant law of contract and explain what terms were actually agreed between them and the designer".



Two friends, A + B own a hotel and want to expand the building.

They called in a designer and told her their terms.

They said they want a new roof. The roof had to be retractable, made of stainless steel and glass.

They also wanted a new spa. This had to be made out of cedar wood.


The designer stated the work could be completed in 4 months at a cost of £200,500.

The designer then said the roof should be made out of timber and glass. The designer did not mention the wood to be used in the spa.


The two friends replied stating that the price was fine. However they insisted on the original materials.

They also said the work must be completed in 3 months. Then they sent a written contract with these terms and their signatures to the designer.


The designer received the written contract. She then added a clause saying "The agreement will be carried out under the conditions of my previous communication".

She signed it. Sent it back to A + B.


A + B received it. Read it. Then made the first payment.

A + B then went away on holiday while the work was carried out.

On their return after 2 and a half months, they found that the work had not been completed.

The roof had been made out of timber and glass. The spa was made out of marble.

They are unhappy and want to take action.



Well I am still unsure who is in the right. I think when A + B invited the designer, this was an invitation to treat. Meaning no offer was made, they just wanted to know how much it would cost.

They then made an offer to the designer.

But as she added a clause, this offer became void.

They then agreed to the new offer, with the clause, by making payment.

So I assume the agreement was under the designers terms, so they have no right to claim anything.

Anyone think different?

Thanks
 
We generally do not do homework for people. I would agree with you though. The original contract was modified, and they still paid the consideration which indicates their agreement with the modification. Though the modification is also very vague as it incorporates a verbal explanation that could have many details and therefore makes the contract very loose. They however let the designer work and he is due quantum meruit.

Basically they are on an oral contract with their written contract as advisory evidence. You are on the right track with your answer.
 
Thanks for your help, I appreciate it.

Although I did not ask anyone to do my homework for me.

I stated the case, then gave my opinion.

Just wanted guidance to see if I was on the right lines.
 
I.R.A.C. it!

Northville:

The issues to discuss in order to determine the rights and remedies of the parties that I can see would be that obviously this is a construction contract with use of tangible matters, so the laws governing would be common law and U.C.C; another issue to discuss and decide is the contract's TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE clause.

At the mere mention of word form in any hypo, give good credence to the issue of BATTLE OF FORMS and also the issue of acceptance containing terms different and or in addition to the terms in the original offer.

Disparate and use of non conforming material mentioned is the clue to discuss what constitutes Breach versus Total Breach and since homeowner is using that excuse to forgo payment on the contract, let's not forget the issue of Substantial Performance by the designer.

The owner cannot avoid payment on the contract but the designer is not entitled to the full value of it for use of nonconforming material; so the homeowner pays the designer less the difference in price of material used.

Well, in a nutshell of course.

fredrikklaw
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top