During negotiations for the sale of a well to be used to water animals, Hutton said the well was free of gypsum and brine (salty water). In fact, the well did contain gypsum, although there was no
Was it, explain?
Friday, February 27, 2015
Selling a Well
During negotiations for the sale of a well to be used to water animals, Hutton said the well was free of gypsum and brine (salty water). In fact, the well did contain gypsum, although there was no
Was it, explain?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYes there was misrepresentation. He said there wasn't gypsum. There was gypsum. So this was misrepresentation.
ReplyDeleteI believe it was misrepresented. The was one mineral the was specifically claimed not to be. Curry has every right not to pay. That is all.
ReplyDeleteYes. There was gypsum. He said there was no brine and gypsum. There was gypsum, so the well couldn't be used.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that it ws misrepresented there was no gypsum
ReplyDeletethere is misrepresentation. they lied about there not being gypsum in the well. the well wasnt suited to water animals so the buyer would have been out of luck. they could have lost their entire life savings buying animals and by the time they realized it was the well they would have lost everything and have to live on the streets and while living on the streets he would become hungry and when he got hungry he would get desperate and when he gets desperate he will do crazy things for money. when he does crazy things for money he will brake the law and eventually get comfortable on the wrong side of the law so he would seek out the person that sold him the faulty well and he would do harm to them so in the end i is doing more harm to the seller being dishonest than telling him the truth.
ReplyDelete