Question

When discussing the sale of a used Beechcraft Baron airplane, a United Technologies agent told Thompson the plane was "excellently maintained" and said it had been inspected for airworthiness every 100 hours. Thompson signed a sales agreement that stated in large, bold letters that the plane was sold "AS IS" and that there were "no representations or warranties, express or implied, including the condition of the aircraft, its merchantability, or its fitness for any particular purpose." The sales contract did not say anything about the plane's maintenance history or current condition. When Thompson tried to fly the plane after purchasing it, he immediately experienced problems with its brakes, steering, ability to climb, and performance while cruising. Can Thompson successfully sue United for breach of express and implied warranties?

Answer 1

No, he can´t.

Step-by-step explanation:

The implied warranties are basically legal terms, that assure the good conditions, functionality, and merchantability of determined product.

In this case, it´s implied that the same happens with this ¨Beechcraft Baron Airplane¨ transaction, the agent assured and gave his word to Thompson, affirming the ¨excellent general conditions¨ of the plane, and because of this, the deal was made.

However, Mr. Thompon´s committed a ¨innocent mistake¨, once he closed the sales agreement.

This mistake was basically signing the agreement under the ¨AS IS¨ conditions provoking the automatically denial of the ¨implied warranty¨ regular application , since it was clearly stated in bold letters the previous phrase and, ¨no representations or warranties, express or implied, including the condition of the aircraft, its merchantability, or its fitness for any particular purpose.".

Mr. Thompson agreed to trust 100% on the agents word ( that´s why was cataloged as a ¨innocent mistake¨) that the plane was in excellent conditions, this way he proceeded to sign all the papers, accepting the supposed ¨remarkable and functional status¨ (even when it wasn´t the case) of it, this way ignoring the phrases and different specifications stated in the contract, this automatically removed the ¨implied warranty¨ condition, and exempted United Technologies of any kind of responsibility