Bingo owned a well-known shop in Kula Lumpur selling used (second hand) cars. Bingo hired Wong to work as a salesperson. Wong was instructed to handle all regular sales, but to refer all requests for discounts and all complaints to Bingo. Jane, a university student, wanted to buy a new car, which was affordable. However, the car that Jane liked was marked at RM10,000. Jane sent a WhatsApp message to Bingo to inquire about the car. Bingo responded by saying: "please come to the shop and talk to the salesperson, Wong. He will be able to help you". Jane does, as suggested. Jane being a good negotiator, managed to convince Wong to sell the car to her for RM8,000. Wong fell to Jane's charming ability to negotiate that he completely forgot that he was supposed to obtain Bingo's approval on the car's sale for RM8,000 to Jane. In fact, Bingo had purchased the car for RM8,500, and therefore the sale represented a loss.

Advise Bingo whether he is bound by the deal offered to Jane and whether he has any cause of action against Wong.

This question is based in Malaysia. Please use Malaysian or English cases to support answer. Contracts Act 1950 to be used for any statutes or laws. IRAC method to be applied.