Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Troodon, post: 341797, member: 4626&quot;]Expertise is no guarantee of being right nor is its lack proof of being wrong.&nbsp; Anyone can make a mistake, no matter how experienced (less likely with experience of course, but not impossible) and anyone can acquire knowledge even with little or no experience.&nbsp; Not to mention that interpretation of the law, especially in civil cases, can largely be a subjective matter of opinion.&nbsp; It&#039;s a matter of fact what the law <i>says</i>, but what the law <i>means</i> is often a matter of interpretation.&nbsp; However, I&#039;d certaintly put more faith an expert opinion than a less informed one... if a majority of experts have a consensus on an issue that differs from mine, I&#039;d certaintly be willing to change my mind.&nbsp; But if the experts have mixed opinions, I&#039;d at least feel confident that some experts agree with me.</p><p><br /></p><p>But since you claim to have this experience, what would be your expert opinion on a case where a seller sells an item to a buyer that is not how the seller described it, and claims he has a right to charge a fee anyway, becuase the contract mentioned a restocking fee?&nbsp; Correct me if I&#039;m wrong here, but I was under the impression that a contract is a two way obligation, and if one party fails to hold up their end of the contract, it releases the other party from their obligation to hold up <i>their</i> end of it.&nbsp; In the example of the eBay auction: The buyer has entered into a contract with the seller to pay an agreed upon amount in exchange for the seller providing the buyer with a certain described item.&nbsp; If the seller provides an item not as described under the contract (by a provable objective measure, not just a difference of opinion; for example the coin sent clearly doesn&#039;t match the picture shown on the auction page), the seller has failed to honor his terms of the contract.&nbsp; At that point, I would say the buyer is released from any legal obligation to hold up his end.&nbsp; Would you or would you not agree with that?</p><p><br /></p><p>Even experts can disagree of course, so the fact that an expert disagrees with me doesn&#039;t prove I&#039;m wrong, but if an expert agrees with me it certaintly makes me more confident about being right.&nbsp; However even if you disagree with me I&#039;d still be interested to hear your opinion on the matter as it&#039;s a fundamental aspect of contract law as to what obligations a party has or doesn&#039;t have when another party fails to uphold their obligations under the contract.&nbsp; It&#039;s long been my understanding that a party to a contract is legally obligated to abide by its terms so long as all other parties do the same (not to mention the first party to breach it may also be held liable for damages caused by breach of contract)... is that or is that not correct, in your expert opinion?[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in