Camal Terry signed a “Sales Contract” to buy a 1995 BMW 3 Series from Robin Drive Auto, a car dealership in Delaware. Terry agreed to pay $4,995, and Robin Drive agreed to hold the BMW on layaway for him in contemplation of a sale within twenty-one days. Also specified were a down payment of $1,200 and the timing of other payments. Under the payment schedule, Terry was to pay $100 a week for six weeks (forty-two days) even though the sale was to take place twenty-one days later. The contract provided that these payments were fees for storage and “prep” and were not deductible from the price of the car. Terry paid more than $1,000 before asking Robin Drive to refund the money. When the dealership refused, Terry filed a suit in a Delaware state court against Robin Drive. Testimony about the mismatched contract terms was conflicting. [ Terry v. Robin Drive Auto, 2017 WL 65842 (Del.Com.Pl. 2017)] (See The Formation of Sales and Lease Contracts.)

(a) Ethically, what is wrong with this deal? Explain.

(b) Using the IDDR approach, consider whether Robin Drive has an ethical obligation to use a different contract in its sales to consumers.