Tommy McCartney is a sixteen-year-old high school student. He has worked forty h
ID: 442384 • Letter: T
Question
Tommy McCartney is a sixteen-year-old high school student. He has worked forty hours per week at the local convenience store over the last year, and has diligently saved $6,000 for the purchase of his first car.
While visiting a local car dealership, Tommy finds the “car of his dreams,” a used yellow Camaro. Tommy walks into the dealership, announces to the dealership owner that he is “ready to buy,” negotiates $6,000 as the purchase price, and leaves the dealership a proud car owner.
Over the course of the next six months, Tommy drives the Camaro eight thousand miles, wears the tires thin, dents the left front fender, and regrets his purchase. He realizes that in two short years college will beckon, and he knows that his parents cannot afford to pay for his higher education. In short, he wants his money back.
On a Saturday morning, Tommy returns to the car dealership, walks into the sales office, and hands the keys to the seller, asking for the return of his $6,000. The dealer chuckles, and then his look turns stern, saying “Son, I don’t owe you anything. You’ve just learned a lesson in the ‘School of Hard Knocks.’ The car is still yours, and the money is still mine!”
Who will prevail? Is it legal and/or ethical to allow Tommy to escape his contractual obligations?
Explanation / Answer
Tommy and the car dealer did not enter any agreement as Tommy was just 16 at the time of buying the car and do not had the full legal capacity to enter the contract. US law prohibits any minor (below 16 years) to enter into any contract and discourages sellers to enter any contract with minors. US law has every provision to protect a minor against contractual agreement and provides minors with a right of disaffirmance i.e. Minors’ right, until reasonable time after reaching age of majority, to disaffirm/avoid their contracts. The disaffirmance criterias are as follows:
-To exercise right, minor need only demonstrate, through words and/or actions, intent to rescind contract
-Minor must return any consideration received (if still in minor’s possession/control), regardless of condition
-Even if consideration damaged/destroyed, other party has no recourse against minor
In the given case, as Tommy was a minor at the time of buying the car as well as while returning, Tommy will prevail or will be able to recover his money.
----------------------------------
It is indded legal as per US law. Now the question is whether its ethical or not. The law is designed based on the understanding that a minor does not have the maturity or understanding to get involved into any contract- thus it can be said legal. But the very fact that the buyer is also in loss if some buyer returns the good and ask for money for his or her purchase after quite a long time- so a certain amount of concession should also be there for the buyer. One may argue that ethically the sellershould not enter into a contract with a minor-true but its not always possible for a seller to judge the age of the buyer especially in a sale of used vehicle.