UCC apply to rejection of animal?

[RRevak]

The only real ways I see OP getting out of this is if it was something along the lines of seller representing the horse as quiet and with good manners but when OP arrives, the horse turns out to be green broke and wild as they come. Or, seller represented the horse as being a 2nd level dressage competitor when in reality, horse barely makes it through training level. Drastic difference. A simple "not the personality I wanted" more than likely won't fly as a legitimate reason to back out of a sale.

 

[tranquility]

The UCC applies to goods. That being said, one cannot find a good to not be perfect tender for "personality" reasons. If the horse is a horse (of course) if one wanted to talk to a horse one would not find help in the UCC under the perfect tender rule to get out of the deal.

In other words, the UCC applies. But, I suspect the horse in question is proper tender. The actual contract would rule on if the horse would meet specifications.

 

[You Are Guilty]

The only thing I know about horses comes from watching Late Night with Craig Ferguson, so take this with a (lick) of salt - what about a fitness for particular purpose claim? Depending on what, exactly, the personality "needed" was, if a horse of a different color was provided, any hope?

 

[RRevak]

The only thing I know about horses comes from watching Late Night with Craig Ferguson, so take this with a (lick) of salt - what about a fitness for particular purpose claim? Depending on what, exactly, the personality "needed" was, if a horse of a different color was provided, any hope?

YAG that's where I was going with my upper post. If the seller represented the horse as being one thing, but OP arrived and horse was very much NOT, then there might be recourse. Although it would have to be a drastic and provable difference. Also, i've been buying and selling horses as a professional for over a decade and I have NEVER seen an instance where there wasn't a statement made in regards to deposits. The story OP is feeding us about there not being a contract etc is to my professional ears, a pile of poo.

 

[tranquility]

The only thing I know about horses comes from watching Late Night with Craig Ferguson, so take this with a (lick) of salt - what about a fitness for particular purpose claim? Depending on what, exactly, the personality "needed" was, if a horse of a different color was provided, any hope?

Certainly, there could be some warranty if the OP sought advice on which was the correct horse and the seller directed him to this horse and the OP relied on the seller's representation. But, purpose is different from personality. I'd think that the actual contract requirements would be the only real way to get out of this one. Breach of implied warranty on a horse's personality? That seems a harder case than the cost of a horse is worth, but, like you, I know little about the business of buying or selling livestock.

 

[RRevak]

Certainly, there could be some warranty if the OP sought advice on which was the correct horse and the seller directed him to this horse and the OP relied on the seller's representation. But, purpose is different from personality. I'd think that the actual contract requirements would be the only real way to get out of this one. Breach of implied warranty on a horse's personality? That seems a harder case than the cost of a horse is worth, but, like you, I know little about the business of buying or selling livestock.

Btw Tranq, this is an example of a standard equine contract of sale where a deposit is considered (mine are very similar with a few notes difference). Note the "non refundable" statement regarding deposits even in the instance the horse does not satisfy expectations. I'm willing to bet OP received, and agreed to, something very similar to this.

http://equine2.com/static/SellerSaleAgreement-EarnestMoneyDeposit.pdf

As to your statement regarding worth of the horse; Breach of implied warranty can be a big deal when the cost of some of these animals exceeds the 6 figure range. I know someone who just sold one of their mares for approx $216,000 to an owner in Beijing.

 

[tranquility]

As to your statement regarding worth of the horse; Breach of implied warranty can be a big deal when the cost of some of these animals exceeds the 6 figure range. I know someone who just sold one of their mares for approx $216,000 to an owner in Beijing.

I'm thinking this is not one of those horses. Those horses usually have some contract attached and the buyer is not looking to the UCC for assistance.

As to the contract, it seems the sole contingency is a vet examination for the good health and fit for the buyer's purpose. Personality would not be covered, just if the horse could not race, plow, be ridden as a physical issue. If the vet exam is fine, the horse is sold. The deposit is not refundable no matter what the contingency comes out as.

5.1 SELLER MAKES NO WARRANTIES WHETHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE
PURCHASE OF THIS HORSE IS SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND
CONDITIONS OF AN “AS IS” SALE.

 

[RRevak]

I'm thinking this is not one of those horses. Those horses usually have some contract attached and the buyer is not looking to the UCC for assistance.

As to the contract, it seems the sole contingency is a vet examination for the good health and fit for the buyer's purpose. Personality would not be covered, just if the horse could not race, plow, be ridden as a physical issue. If the vet exam is fine, the horse is sold. The deposit is not refundable no matter what the contingency comes out as.

Since OP refused to provide any details regarding anything other than a want for a blanket yes or no answer, I couldn't figure out if the bolded would be something OP could possibly use. Again giving me the indication that OP indeed signed such a contract and is now wanting out through any means possible. And if the seller was indeed a "merchant" as Op stated, i'm more than convinced of the existence of written deposit details. Real sellers tend to know how to cover their bases in these situations.

 

[tranquility]

Since OP refused to provide any details regarding anything other than a want for a blanket yes or no answer, I couldn't figure out if the bolded would be something OP could possibly use. Again giving me the indication that OP indeed signed such a contract and is now wanting out through any means possible. And if the seller was indeed a "merchant" as Op stated, i'm more than convinced of the existence of written deposit details. Real sellers tend to know how to cover their bases in these situations.

The actual clause in the contract (You provided. I agree a regular seller of horses will have something similar.):

4.1. Veterinary Examination. Buyer’s obligation to Purchase the Horse is subject to an inspection
and written certification by a licensed veterinarian that the Horse is in good health and physical
condition, fit for the intended purpose or use contemplated by the Buyer and
_________________________________________________________.

It seems anything other than a physical examination would require a horse whisperer and not a vet.

 

[Sloop John D]

The actual contract would rule on if the horse would meet specifications.

I think this is key. Even if there were some kind of definite verbal agreement that the horse should have a certain type of personality, once the agreement is reduced to writing you're going to have trouble relying on anything that's not in the actual contract as a means of backing out of the deal.

If the goods conform to the actual contract, it's going to be difficult to claim the goods are nonconforming due to some verbal statement made before the contract was signed.

 

[justalayman]

I think this is key. Even if there were some kind of definite verbal agreement that the horse should have a certain type of personality, once the agreement is reduced to writing you're going to have trouble relying on anything that's not in the actual contract as a means of backing out of the deal.

If the goods conform to the actual contract, it's going to be difficult to claim the goods are nonconforming due to some verbal statement made before the contract was signed.

I think that is the issue; no written contract. It appears there were negotiations and representations but no actual written contract. OP refused to accept the horse when he went to pick it up so no finality of anything that would follow.

I never had a contract with the seller, just a written receipt for the deposit and several emails outlining exactly what I was looking for in a horse and the seller saying he had a horse matching what I was looking for.

if it gets to where there was no actual contract (I would wonder why a person would go to pick up a horse with no contract in place by that is irrelevant), then the OP has to deal with a the deposit. There has to be some contract concerning that regardless of whether it is verbal or written.
So, if there was not a contract to purchase that particular horse, then what does the payment represent. Was is a partial payment of some nebulous contract that was never made? Was it the purchase of an option (essentially a holding deposit)?

 

[tranquility]

I think that is the issue; no written contract. It appears there were negotiations and representations but no actual written contract. OP refused to accept the horse when he went to pick it up so no finality of anything that would follow.

If there really was no written contract and the horse went for over $500, then the statute of frauds would be implicated.

 

[Jewels2]

There really was no written contract. I do have our email exchanges and a receipt. In fact, my deposit was placed for a horse matching the personality I requested. The seller said he had one. I was buying the horse solely on personality and was very up front with the seller in regard to exactly what I was looking for. People buy horses based on personality all the time. For example, you wouldn't want your child out on a horse that was not well broke and proven good with children. And if you tell someone you do not want a horse that bites and then you get there and the horse bites someone, why should you be stuck buying the horse just because the seller thinks you should and doesn't want to return your money? Doesn't seem right to me.

 

[justalayman]

it isn't but that doesn't necessarily mean you have a claim for a return of the down payment. It doesn't mean you don't either so...



since you state you did not have a contract, what was the payment for, very specifically.

 

[quincy]

There really was no written contract. I do have our email exchanges and a receipt. In fact, my deposit was placed for a horse matching the personality I requested. The seller said he had one. I was buying the horse solely on personality and was very up front with the seller in regard to exactly what I was looking for. People buy horses based on personality all the time. For example, you wouldn't want your child out on a horse that was not well broke and proven good with children. And if you tell someone you do not want a horse that bites and then you get there and the horse bites someone, why should you be stuck buying the horse just because the seller thinks you should and doesn't want to return your money? Doesn't seem right to me.

I am curious, Jewels2, and my question probably has no relevance to the deposit-return that you are asking about here, but:

Because you say the horse seller is in Michigan, and you are in Michigan, and Michigan is not all that big a state, was there some reason why you could not travel to the ranch to check out the horse prior to paying a deposit? Were you told that this particular horse had more than one buyer interested in purchasing it and that a deposit was necessary to hold the horse?