Jackson entered into a contract with James DeWitt for the construction of an in-ground pool. The...

Transcribed Image Text:

Jackson entered into a contract with James DeWitt for the construction of an in-ground pool. The contract provided that DeWitt would build a pool for Jackson at an estimated cost of $20,000. At the time the contract was signed, Jackson paid DeWitt $11,400 in cash and then financed the remaining cost of $7,500 through a Retail Installment Security Agreement (RISA) given to him by DeWitt. Associates Financial Services Company (Associates) provided DeWitt with all the forms necessary to document the financing of the pool. Consumer requests for financing were subject to Associates approving the application. Associates approved the financing for Jackson's pool. When the RISA was completed, DeWitt assigned it to Associates. Jackson made two monthly payments to Associates of $202.90 each and a final payment of $7,094.20 while the pool was still under construction. When the pool was completed and filled, it failed to hold water. The pool had several leaks and was not able keep water within it. Jackson then had the pool removed. Jackson sued both DeWitt and Associates to get his money back. DeWitt argued that he had assigned the contract and therefore had nothing to do with the financing and that Associates needed to pay Jackson. Associates, on the other hand, said that DeWitt was the one who should reimburse Jackson because it was DeWitt who built the faulty pool. Who will win? Jackson entered into a contract with James DeWitt for the construction of an in-ground pool. The contract provided that DeWitt would build a pool for Jackson at an estimated cost of $20,000. At the time the contract was signed, Jackson paid DeWitt $11,400 in cash and then financed the remaining cost of $7,500 through a Retail Installment Security Agreement (RISA) given to him by DeWitt. Associates Financial Services Company (Associates) provided DeWitt with all the forms necessary to document the financing of the pool. Consumer requests for financing were subject to Associates approving the application. Associates approved the financing for Jackson's pool. When the RISA was completed, DeWitt assigned it to Associates. Jackson made two monthly payments to Associates of $202.90 each and a final payment of $7,094.20 while the pool was still under construction. When the pool was completed and filled, it failed to hold water. The pool had several leaks and was not able keep water within it. Jackson then had the pool removed. Jackson sued both DeWitt and Associates to get his money back. DeWitt argued that he had assigned the contract and therefore had nothing to do with the financing and that Associates needed to pay Jackson. Associates, on the other hand, said that DeWitt was the one who should reimburse Jackson because it was DeWitt who built the faulty pool. Who will win?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

In the given scenario the contract for the pool construction was completely with the Jame... View the full answer