Keller V Inland
keller v [Type the company name] | Keller v. Inland Metals | Unit 2 | | Sherry Rhodes | 11/2/2011 |
[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document.] |
According to the facts of the case Keller v. Inland Metals All Weather Conditioning, Inc, the question arises if there was an express warranty presented by the conversations held between both parties. If the express warranty was made then the decision falls on whether or not the company breached the warranty.
The facts state that the Keller’s were in need of a industrial dehumidifier to eliminate the hot, humid, foul-smelling air near and around the pool area. Not having much knowledge of the correct size needed for the job, they received two bids. One bid on a 7.5 ton and the other on a 10 ton dehumidifier. Thinking the 7.5 ton would be too small the Keller’s had the president of Inland Metals and a representative for the manufacturer visit the club. Both agreed that the 7.5 would work. Inland then followed up with a letter stating the same information, that the 7.5 ton would work and rid the club of the issues they were having. Once the dehumidifier was installed it did not perform to the standards set by the president of Inland and the manufacturer representative.
From the correspondence between both parties, I believe that Inland did breach the express warranty. Inland believes that they did not guarantee would fix all the problems. But in the correspondence they stated that once the dehumidifier is installed the air problems should be over with. Inland also stated that the ducted system will rid you of the sweating walls and eliminate the offensive odors and overall bad air. This is the express warranty made to the customer. They have said that their product will fix the problems the club was experiencing
[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document.] |
According to the facts of the case Keller v. Inland Metals All Weather Conditioning, Inc, the question arises if there was an express warranty presented by the conversations held between both parties. If the express warranty was made then the decision falls on whether or not the company breached the warranty.
The facts state that the Keller’s were in need of a industrial dehumidifier to eliminate the hot, humid, foul-smelling air near and around the pool area. Not having much knowledge of the correct size needed for the job, they received two bids. One bid on a 7.5 ton and the other on a 10 ton dehumidifier. Thinking the 7.5 ton would be too small the Keller’s had the president of Inland Metals and a representative for the manufacturer visit the club. Both agreed that the 7.5 would work. Inland then followed up with a letter stating the same information, that the 7.5 ton would work and rid the club of the issues they were having. Once the dehumidifier was installed it did not perform to the standards set by the president of Inland and the manufacturer representative.
From the correspondence between both parties, I believe that Inland did breach the express warranty. Inland believes that they did not guarantee would fix all the problems. But in the correspondence they stated that once the dehumidifier is installed the air problems should be over with. Inland also stated that the ducted system will rid you of the sweating walls and eliminate the offensive odors and overall bad air. This is the express warranty made to the customer. They have said that their product will fix the problems the club was experiencing
References: 1. Beatty, J. F., & Samuelson, S. S. (2010). Introduction to Business Law. (3rd ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.