Question

Bob is a recognized french horn player. Bob has played for several major symphonies. Last year Bob went through bankruptcy and in order to pay his rent for a couple of months took out loans from a small bank - Avarice Bank - and pledged his french horn as collateral. He was unable to make the first payment on the loan so the bank was getting ready to take the french horn for non-payment. Bob approached the director of the Gilroy Philarmonic International Symphony - Joe - for help - asking him to guarantee payment so he does not lose his french horn. Joe agreed to guarantee the payment - partially because Bob is scheduled as the featured performer at the Classic Polka Festival in Gilroy which Joe manages. Joe called Avarice Bank and said if Bob could not pay, he would, and Avarice accepted his guaranty by phone. Bob played for the Polka Festival (it was very successful), but immediately after, left town and his whereabouts are unknown. Avarice has contacted Joe and indicated they have not collected from Bob and they expect Joe to pay the debt. Joe told Avarice they did not have anything in writing from him (though there are witnesses who heard Joe guarantee payment) and he believes he will not be liable for Bob's debt. Avarice has indicated it will file suit for payment against Joe.

Business

Answer 1

◆ The two aspects of the case are as follows:

1. Avarice Bank which has given a loan to the French horn player Bob Areebob as he pledged a French horn as a collateral. But he was unable to pay back the loan. Later the Director of Gilroy Philharmonic International Symphony - Joe Dogooder has been gave the oral guarantee. Later the Bob didn't pay the debt and left the city without contacted by the Bob for the payment guarantee. The payment which the Bob has taken by the bank. Joe Dogooder agreed as knowledge of others. Then the ban contacted the Director Joe to pay the debt but herefuses to pay.

2. The Bob was working as featured performer at the Classic Polka Festival in Gilroy which Joe manages. So, the Joe has given the oral guarantee that he will pay off the debt if Bob could not.

Both the aspects are very clear according to the case. The first aspect was more powerful as the Avarice Bank has the taken the oral guarantee from the director Joe Dogooder on behalf of principal debtor Bob. The bank would prevail in this case. This is because the bank has the evidence that they had given loan because they have assured that they would get back the debt in later stage.

Legal issue/dispute is between bank and the Direct of the Gilroy Philharmonic International Symphony- Joe Dogooder. It is related to the payment of the debt which was guaranteed by the Joe on behalf of Bob. He refused to pay the amount as he says that he didn't given in written that he would pay if Bob could not.

Decision and Support: The Avarice Bank would prevail because they have the evidence that they didn't recover the amount because of oral guarantee by the Joe. I supported the bank because the Bank has the proof and they actually given the loan because of the security (guarantee) they got from the Joe.

Dissent: The strongest arguments the losing party can/will make is that he did not given in the written that he will pay the debt of Bob and he has n number of employees which he manages daily how he can able to take liability of debt of employee. It is not his fault that they pay or not pay. He didn't give any statement in written.

Thank you.