The Singh family lived in rented accommodation in the northeast Calgary community of Taradale. They wanted to move into the new subdivision of Redstone and toured several show homes in that community. They were quite impressed with some of the homes built by Contemporary Builders. Given the current mortgage rates, the Singhs obtained pre-approval from the bank to purchase a home up to $600,000 in value. During a July meeting with Narinder, a salesman for Contemporary Builders, the Singhs outlined what they wanted in a new home: They specifically wanted the Mark IV model home which boasted 1750 square feet on two floors, with 3 bedrooms, a den, unfinished basement, and a double car front drive garage on a 50' x 110' lot. As the lease on their rented accommodation was scheduled to expire at the end of February, they asked for a possession date of no later than February 28. The agreed upon price was $575,000, inclusive of GST. Narinder, on behalf of Contemporary Builders, drew up a sales contract that reflected the discussions between Narinder and the Singhs. It listed the correct model home, the correct price and the promised possession date. In the fine print, the contract stated that the stated possession date was not a firm date but rather a tentative date, subject to confirmation 90 days prior to actual completion. Narinder did not bring this clause to the Singh's attention and they did not read the whole contract and therefore missed this clause. The Singhs secured the necessary bank financing and paid a $50,000 deposit to Contemporary Builders so that construction could commence. By November, due to an increase in the cost of labour and building materials, it became apparent to Narinder that Contemporary Builders was not going to make any profit on the Singh house deal. Narinder had negotiated a deal that in the end was not favorable for his employer, Contemporary Builders. Narinder was afraid of being fired so he met with the Singhs to tell them that Contemporary Builders would not be able to finish their home by the end of February due to increased building costs (as Contemporary wanted to work on more lucrative existing building contracts). Narinder said that if the Singhs would pay an additional $32,000, Contemporary Builders would ensure the home was built as promised by end the February. Because the Singhs would be losing their rental accommodation at the end of February and they did not want to rent another home, they agreed to pay the extra money requested. The Singhs asked that a new contract be drawn up to reflect their discussions, but Narinder said that it was not necessary to do so and said that their verbal agreement was sufficient. Narinder also asked that the $32,000 be paid to him personally, in cash. The Singhs thought this arrangement was highly unusual but felt pressured to make the payment in order to get their home built on time. Like many people who are having a home built, the Singhs regularly checked on the progress of their new home construction. By the middle of January, it became readily apparent to them that their home would not be completed by the end of February. It also appeared that the house being built for them was the Mark III model which while still 1750 square feet, did not have a den. When they went to the show home office of Contemporary Builders to discuss their concerns with Narinder, they learned from salesperson Sarah that he no longer worked for Contemporary Builders. Further, Sarah said that their home was not going to be ready until the end of May. When the Singhs protested, Sarah pointed out the fine print clause about the completion date being tentative with a 90-day confirmation clause. The Singhs mentioned the $32,000 payment they made to Narinder but Sarah could find no record of it. The Singhs said they no longer wanted the home and Sarah said that Contemporary Builders would take them to court if they did not go ahead with the purchase. In early March, the Singhs came to you for advice, knowing that you were taking the world-famous Business Law course at the University of Lethbridge. Please fully advise them on the following questions: 1. Are the Singhs legally bound to go through with the deal? Explain in detail why they are or are not legally bound to pay for and take possession of the house. 2. If they are bound to go ahead with the deal, how do you address the fact that they received a Mark III home rather than the Mark IV? 3. Do the Singhs have a cause of action regarding the three month delay in the completion of their home? If so, against whom and why? If so, what amount of damages would be appropriate and why? 4. What would be the consequences, if any, to the Singhs if they simply walk away from the contract, pay no further money and do not take possession of the house? 5. Can the Singhs recover the $32,000 they paid to Narinder? If so, state the appropriate cause(s) of action, the appropriate defendant(s) and why