Legal Question in Consumer Law in California

This is more of an area of Contract Law but there is no option for it.

I read a scenario in one of my text books and it really threw me. I believe you could argue both ways in relation to whether a contract was formed or not Especially due to the wording used. What do you think and why?

Scenario:

Jack is driving along the road when he see's a Holden Ute on someones property. It is an old model that has been done up. Jack and his friend jump out the car and look at the ute from the property boundry.

Bob the owner sees Jack and his friend looking and comes over and confirms it is an old FJ Holden that has been done up. "We never use it and i might as well sell it" says Bob. "How much do you want for it" Jack asks Bob. "Make me an offer" says Bob. "Would you take $10 000 for it" Jack says. "That sounds like a fair price" says Bob.

Jack's mobile then rings and it's his dad, he has to leave. "Gotta go, be back later" Jack says. Jack is about to run off but then he see's a trailer that appears to be custom made. "That for sale too" Jack aks. "Sure is" says Bob, "You can have it for $1 000".

This is more money that what Jaack has and he needs to do some sums before he commits myself. "Here, I'll leave this with you to hold the car for me until I get back" Jack says and gives Bob a picture of a FJ Holden that is signed by a racing driver who used the race the car.

When Jack gets back Bob's wife has sold the car with Bob's knowledge. Bob says, "Sorry son, this photo is worthless. It's not even a real photo, it's just a picture torn out of a magazine". "Well to me it's my most prized possession" Jack says.

Did Jack enter into a contract?

Does Bob taking the photo constitute enough for a promise of consideration?

1 Answer from Attorneys

Related Questions & Answers

More Consumer Law questions and answers in California

Looking for something else?