Do I have to return deposit on boat, or am I entitled to keep?!

[captpjt]

What is the name of your state? Massachusetts

Buyer put $1000 ( his choice of amount) deposit on $9000 boat, then 1 week later decided, " a boat just isn't for me" and wanted to back out with a full return of his deposit. Should I have returned it to him, or am I entitled to keep it since several potential buyers were refused to be able to see the boat because it was under deposit?!

I have looked for any MA laws pertaining to deposits on vehicles/boats, but have not really found any; anybody know where I might find them?! Or, have any substantial advice?!

 

[JETX]

Buyer put $1000 ( his choice of amount) deposit on $9000 boat, then 1 week later decided, " a boat just isn't for me" and wanted to back out with a full return of his deposit. Should I have returned it to him, or am I entitled to keep it since several potential buyers were refused to be able to see the boat because it was under deposit?

What EXACTLY does your WRITTEN agreement say as to the deposit??
WHAT!!! You don't HAVE a written agreement??!! Why not??

Absent anything to the contrary, return his deposit to him. Or you can offer to return the deposit less any 'shortage' you incur due to his breach.
Lets say that the boat sells for $9000. You owe him the full $1000.
If the boat sells for $8500, you owe him $500 (your 'loss' due to his breach).
If the boat sells for $10,000, you owe him $2000 (his deposit, PLUS the $1000 overage!!).

So, what 'game' do you want to play??

 

[captpjt]

JETX, Thanks for the reply; it seems you are quite the Die Hard on here!!

As far as a written contract I have a , " Receipt of Deposit" which identifies the Seller and Buyer, the boat, the amount of deposit, and the balance remaining upon delivery/pickup. It is signed by both of us. Do you think this qualifies as a valid contract?!

I am going before a jury tomorrow on an appeal of a Clerk Magistrate's decision for me to fully return the deposit(plus his court costs). The CM shut me down on his initial hearing and wouldn't hear anything I had to say, while allowing the other party to speak freely, so I appealed to get it in front of a jury. The boat sold 7 weeks later for $800 less.

 

[Zigner]

If the boat sells for $10,000, you owe him $2000 (his deposit, PLUS the $1000 overage!!).

This part's not correct - you would not be liable for an "overage".

 

[JETX]

This part's not correct - you would not be liable for an "overage".

Sorry, but not correct. If I represented the 'buyer'..... and found out that the seller sold for a higher price, you bet we would certainly request adequate compensation for the seller selling my clients boat (and of course, we would claim that since the deposit was not refunded, a valid contract remained) making the boat NOT the sellers to sell!!). The decision on whether the overage was owed or not would be up to the court to decide.

 

[TheHomeGuru]

Sorry, but not correct. If I represented the 'buyer'..... and found out that the seller sold for a higher price, you bet we would certainly request adequate compensation for the seller selling my clients boat (and of course, we would claim that since the deposit was not refunded, a valid contract remained) making the boat NOT the sellers to sell!!). The decision on whether the overage was owed or not would be up to the court to decide.

You missed this part: "The CM shut me down on his initial hearing and wouldn't hear anything I had to say, while allowing the other party to speak freely, so I appealed to get it in front of a jury."

 

[captpjt]

Doesn't judge have to make second call?!

Thanks for all the input everyone. I went to court fully prepared to make my case to a jury, and it never happened!! The judge made first call, and although the plaintiff wasn't there, his wife was. The judge asked where he was and if she was on the contract(for the boat) to which she replied, " I do not know and No I am not". The judge said he would save it for second call and that she had better go find him. Well, second call never happened!!

Apparently there was about five cases to be heard in a jury session that morning, and only one jury!! So, the criminal cases obviously took precedence over my silly little small claims case and the judge never made a second call, which obviously would have been a favorable judgement for me since the plaintiff never showed up. A clerk came and found us ( myself and the plaintiff's wife)to tell us that it would have to be continued, at which point I said I would waive my request for a jury and go before the judge (since it was an automatic win anyway), to which the clerk replied, " the case before the judge now will be the only heard by him today. I was very frustrated.

Anyone know if the judge violated protocol by not making a second call on my case after he gave the plaintiff more time to show up?!

This is in MA.

 

[Zephyr]

Thanks for all the input everyone. I went to court fully prepared to make my case to a jury, and it never happened!! The judge made first call, and although the plaintiff wasn't there, his wife was. The judge asked where he was and if she was on the contract(for the boat) to which she replied, " I do not know and No I am not". The judge said he would save it for second call and that she had better go find him. Well, second call never happened!!

Apparently there was about five cases to be heard in a jury session that morning, and only one jury!! So, the criminal cases obviously took precedence over my silly little small claims case and the judge never made a second call, which obviously would have been a favorable judgement for me since the plaintiff never showed up. A clerk came and found us ( myself and the plaintiff's wife)to tell us that it would have to be continued, at which point I said I would waive my request for a jury and go before the judge (since it was an automatic win anyway), to which the clerk replied, " the case before the judge now will be the only heard by him today. I was very frustrated.

Anyone know if the judge violated protocol by not making a second call on my case after he gave the plaintiff more time to show up?!

This is in MA.

I don't see how he could have violated anything, if there was no more time available in the day, then there wasn't time to make second call, that's not the judges fault.

 

[captpjt]

I don't see how he could have violated anything, if there was no more time available in the day, then there wasn't time to make second call, that's not the judges fault.

Sorry Zephyr, I should have noted that the decision that the case would need to be continued was made @ around 11:00 a.m., when it was still unknown how long the current case that was being heard would take, and there was still many hours left in the court business day.

 

[JETX]

No harm, no foul.
Judges can't dictate exactly how long a matter before them might take. And it is also likely that the court had an afternoon docket to be heard. Simply the fact is your case didn't come up.... and another date/time will be set for your 'automatic win' case.

 

[TheHomeGuru]

Its funny how sometime lady lack turns her back on you when she’s expected to be there by default. I am sure you would place a bet that a judgment would be entered against you, have YOU failed to appear? You kept the boat for Mr. unfaithful to make good on contract and he willingly failed to perform. You sold it for $800.00 less weeks later; had to re advertise and that cost (right?) send him $200.00 minus cost of advertising back along with a nice letter and move on. Wasting time in court is useless once you learn that lady lack have a funny way of working. Good lack!