See especially section 2-608, below. The whole section is relevant,
and pretty much says what I have said.
Copy to the OP with the reminder that I'm going by what he said, and
assuming he didn't leave out anything important.
It does seem hard to believe that they would behave the way the OP
describes since they are so sure to lose. But the catch here is that
"they" didn't do anything. Things are done by one, two, or three
people, who aren't always as reasonable or as informed as their bosses
would want.
Maybe the OP was combative on the phone with the main office, and the
person retaliated by brushing him off, maybe by not even listening to
whether his complaint was valid. Maybe lots of things.
And maybe the op would lose because he loses the contract or the
receipt or has no evidence about what they sent, or what he wanted.
Etc. Suing is a pain in the neck, but when one wins, it feels real
good. Also, be willing to let them make amends after you file suit
but before the trial. In many cases, especially landlord tenant, one
cannot accept the assurance of the other party that they are dropping
the case. Landlords have been known to accept the rent, or partial
rent according to their calculations and leave a tenant with the
impression that everything is settled. Meanwhile, they go to court,
the tenant doesn't, and the ll receives a default eviction order.
Here though, if he has his washer in his house, he's probably safe,
especially since he was the plaintiff, and he would have to be
notified if a counter suit had been filed.
So, based on what he said:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/searc...le2.htm#s2-712
This is not directly on point, and I only offer it because it uses the
term "justifiably revokes acceptance". So there are times when one
can justifiably revoke acceptance.
§ 2-712. "Cover"; Buyer's Procurement of Substitute Goods.
(1) If the seller wrongfully fails to deliver or repudiates or the
buyer rightfully rejects or justifiably revokes acceptance, the buyer
may .....
This is from the Uniform Commercial Code. There have been uniform
codes written on most parts of the law, but the UCC is the most
accepted. It has been enacted in all 50 states, or maybe it was 49,
and a few states have made a few changes, but almost the entire code
is in effect in all 49 or 50 states. I think that is possible because
there aren't too many emotional issues regarding commerce, and because
it makes interstate commerce a lot easier when there is no conflict of
laws. Every state legistlature wants its state to fully participate
in interstate commerce.
The online version I'm citing doesn't include notes, because it says,
it's license doesn't permit displaying notes. Reading the notes would
help to understand things, and might give a case on point or close,
but I don't think it's necessary.
Here is another relevant section that one can reach by . It has to be
read as a whole, because it can be misleading to cite just one
sentence without looking at the rest. Also one must know all the
relevant laws including those not in the UCC or it can be misleading.
That's why others are lawyers and we're not. But here is this part.
See especially section 2-608. The whole section is relevant:
"§ 2-607. Effect of Acceptance; Notice of Breach; Burden of
Establishing Breach After Acceptance; Notice of Claim or Litigation
to Person Answerable Over.
(1) The buyer must pay at the contract rate for any goods accepted.
(2) Acceptance of goods by the buyer precludes rejection of the goods
accepted and if made with knowledge of a non-conformity cannot be
revoked because of it unless the acceptance was on the reasonable
assumption that the non-conformity would be seasonably cured but
acceptance does not of itself impair any other remedy provided by this
Article for non-conformity.
(3) Where a tender has been accepted
(a) the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or
should have discovered any breach notify the seller of breach or be
barred from any remedy; and
(b) [definitely not relevant imo] if the claim is one for infringement
or the like (subsection (3) of Section 2-312) and the buyer is sued as
a result of such a breach he must so notify the seller within a
reasonable time after he receives notice of the litigation or be
barred from any remedy over for liability established by the
litigation.
(4) The burden is on the buyer to establish any breach with respect to
the goods accepted.
(5) Where the buyer is sued for breach of a warranty or other
obligation for which his seller is answerable over
(a) he may give his seller written notice of the litigation. If the
notice states that the seller may come in and defend and that if the
seller does not do so he will be bound in any action against him by
his buyer by any determination of fact common to the two litigations,
then unless the seller after seasonable receipt of the notice does
come in and defend he is so bound.
(b) if the claim is one for infringement or the like (subsection (3)
of Section 2-312) the original seller may demand in writing that his
buyer turn over to him control of the litigation including settlement
or else be barred from any remedy over and if he also agrees to bear
all expense and to satisfy any adverse judgment, then unless the buyer
after seasonable receipt of the demand does turn over control the
buyer is so barred.
(6) The provisions of subsections (3), (4) and (5) apply to any
obligation of a buyer to hold the seller harmless against infringement
or the like (subsection (3) of Section 2-312).
§ 2-608. Revocation of Acceptance in Whole or in Part.
(1) The buyer may revoke his acceptance of a lot or commercial unit
whose non-conformity substantially impairs its value to him if he has
accepted it
(a) on the reasonable assumption that its non-conformity would be
cured and it has not been seasonably cured; or
(b) without discovery of such non-conformity if his acceptance was
reasonably induced either by the difficulty of discovery before
acceptance or by the seller's assurances.
(2) Revocation of acceptance must occur within a reasonable time after
the buyer discovers or should have discovered the ground for it and
before any substantial change in condition of the goods which is not
caused by their own defects. It is not effective until the buyer
notifies the seller of it.
(3) A buyer who so revokes has the same rights and duties with regard
to the goods involved as if he had rejected them.
(4) If a buyer uses the goods after a rightful rejection or
justifiable revocation of acceptance, the following rules apply:
(a) Any use by the buyer that is unreasonable under the circumstances
is wrongful as against the seller and is an acceptance only if
ratified by the seller.
(b) Any use of the goods that is reasonable under the circumstances is
not wrongful as against the seller and is not an acceptance, but in an
appropriate case the buyer is obligated to the seller for the value of
the use to the buyer."