Question

Scenario: Laptop drama!
Clara has become very interested in coding ever since she was hired by Facebook as an accountant. She has decided to learn this new skill, which would help her create computer software and mobile apps for accountants. Last week she purchased a laptop from her best friend, Brian, for the cost of $1,000. When she went through the contract given to her by Brian, Brian guaranteed in writing that the laptop was ‘near new and pretty freaking powerful’. Clara asked Brian about this and Brian assured her verbally that the laptop ‘had no scratches on the screen and it had up to 10-hour battery life’. Clara liked the thin, light and beautifully pink laptop. It was perfect for her to carry around the city on public transport. She trusted Brian. She felt there was no need for her to inspect the laptop and signed the contract without changing it. On the following day, Clara was attending a coding boot camp. She decided to use her freshly purchased laptop to make notes while the presenter was discussing the challenges of coding for new programmers. As she opened the top lid, she was horrified to discover a small crack near the bottom of the screen and when she tried to switch the laptop on, the screen displayed 90% of usable image but a black spot appeared on the screen around the crack. Within ten minutes, the laptop suddenly shut down before the battery was even low.

1. Discuss what assistance/financial compensation Brian would offer Clara if he was taking his responsibilities under contract into account. Use cases to support your recommendation but please exclude statutory law.

Answer 1

Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Consumer Protection will help Clara in order to protect her rights in relation to a product which is not of acceptable quality. Acceptable quality here includes that goods sold to consumers are free from any defect; they are durable and safe for the users.

In case, Brian will take his responsibilities under contract into account, Brain has to refund Clara full amount of $1,000, as the contract mentioned that this amount was for the laptop that was in “near new and pretty freaking powerful”. Also a verbal assurance was given to Clara that the laptop had no scratches on the screen and it had up to 10-hour battery life.

In the similar case of Perel v Eagletronics that was decided on March31, 2006 by Civil Court Of The City Of New York. In this case clamainant purchased air conditioners from defendant and later discovered that fan motor was defective. The judgement was given that the claimant is entitled to recover the purchase price of the air condition that were defective and any other appropriate damages.

Taking reference from this case, it can be identified that in the given scenario of Laptop drama, Brain is liable for returning and refunding of full amount to Clara.