Tanya, a tenant gave Lou, her landlord, a $1,000 security deposit when she moved in.
When she moved out four years later, Lou withheld $500 from Tanya’s deposit because
the carpet was 50% worn out. This was the only damage in the apartment. The carpet
has a normal useful life of eight years, and it costs $1,000. How much of the security
deposit was Lou entitled to withhold?
A. $500, because wear and tear is the responsibility of the tenant.
B. Nothing; Tanya should replace the carpet before moving out.
C. Nothing, because the wear and tear here was ordinary and reasonable.
D. The entire value of the carpet, i.e., $1000.
Sue offers to buy a house from John and they were negotiating the price of the house. In
the meantime, Sue confides in John’s wife that she is willing to pay an amount of
$50,000 for the house. Delighted to hear this, John’s wife tells him the good news. John
immediately calls up Sue and accepts her offer. Is there a binding contract?
A. Yes, because there is valid consideration.
B. Yes, because a third party has communicated the terms of Sue’s offer to John and that
John had accepted the same.
C. No, because the offeror had not communicated the terms of the offer to the offeree.
D. No, because the contract is still not signed by both the parties.
A buyer who is not a merchant rejects nonconforming goods that are not perishable. He:
A. may destroy the goods.
B. must sell the goods for the seller.
C. must hold the goods till the seller is willing to take them back.
D. need not return the goods to the seller.