Fill This Form To Receive Instant Help
Fill This Form To Receive Instant Help
Homework answers / question archive / Sloop John B (hereinafter "Sloop") a 17-year-old rapper extraordinaire, with the Group, Two Live Brew, traveled to Boston for a concert appearance
Sloop John B (hereinafter "Sloop") a 17-year-old rapper extraordinaire, with the Group, Two Live Brew, traveled to Boston for a concert appearance. Sloop decided to purchase a sports car to take in the local sights. Sloop contracted to purchase a sports convertible from Prancing Horse Motors, Ltd. For the sum of $148,000. Sloop agreed to an electronic transfer of the purchase price from his Beverly Hills Bank upon his return to California and the car dealer reluctantly agreed to the arrangement. The following day, after the concert and an all- night party Sloop drove the new convertible into the hotel swimming pool and left it there! The following morning Sloop and his army of handlers (a/k/a posse) checked out of the hotel and left Boston, returning to L.A.. The auto dealership, Prancing Horse Motors, Ltd., contacted the band's representative and Sloop refused to pay for the car. One year later, the car dealership filed suit in court seeking damages in the amount of $148,000. You are the judge assigned the case. Who will be successful and why?
Answer:
Sloop will be successful in this case because at the time of contracting, he was a minor and this means Prancing Horse Motors, Ltd. cannot hold him accountable now that he has turned the age of majority and make him pay for the car.
Step-by-step explanation
When Sloop was contracting to purchase a sports convertible from Prancing Horse Motors, Ltd, he was 17 years old. At the moment, Sloop did not have the capacity to contract and create a binding contract because he was a minor. Despite that Sloop signed the agreement, his contract is unenforceable and void because the defendant had not attained the legal age of majority considered for a person to create a binding contract. In other words, Prancing Horse Motors, Ltd did not have a valid contract with Sloop because he did not have the capacity to contract and purchase the sports car while he was 17 years old. If the company attempts to collect their debt from the defendant, it will be violating the "Fair Debt Collection Practices Act" (FDCPA) because as the creditor, Prancing Horse Motors, Ltd cannot show a valid or existing contract with Sloop. Besides, it is unfair practice to collect a debt that Sloop took while he was still a minor after he has attained the age of majority. Generally, Sloop will win this case, because he is not bound to the contract which he entered one year a go before he turned 18 years old.
References
Noraida, H., Asiah, B., Noor'Ashikin, H., & Kamaliah, S. (2017). Minor? S Capacity To Contract In Malaysia: Issues And Challenges.
