June vs AC Access – Decision

It seemed to me that both June and AC Access were equally responsible for the loss.

June should have contacted her building’s managing agent before making the purchase and gone over with AC Access what the co-op needed before making the purchase.

AC Access is still holding the entire down payment and also has the equipment in his possession, although he lost the benefit of the bargain that he made with June some years ago.

It would be unfair for him to keep the entire down payment.

He said that he may be able to make use of the equipment with another customer. I suggested that if that was not possible, he might be able to sell it on e-Bay. He said that he would try.

I decided to hold AC Access liable for $2,500 or 50% of the down payment with court interest for the years that AC Access held June’s money.

Do you agree?

FacebookTwitterGoogle+LinkedInPrintShare

3 thoughts on “June vs AC Access – Decision

  1. I agree with your decision. June & AC Access are both at fault here.
    Although I have a couple of questions. AC Access is now saying maybe he could sell the units to another client, why the delay? Doesn’t a warranty start after the units are installed? Am I the only person wondering if AC Access is being totally truthful?
    So as I understand it, AC Access is receiving 50% of the down payment ($2,500) and the money he receives after selling the units. And June is granted a return of 1/2 of her down payment of $2,500. Fair?

  2. That sounds fair to me. Both parties share the responsibility for the installation gone wrong. And I don’t see a problem with asking AC Access to pay a little interest on that money. The probability is that
    either he can or could have re-sold the equipment and the fact that
    he apparently has made no effort to do that is not in his favor.

Leave a Reply

Email is not required to leave a comment. Subscribe below to follow the discussion of this post.

Please answer the math question. *