Question

Almovar Electronics sent a letter on March 8 to Conduit Sales & Service Company offering an entire lot of electronic parts at a substantial reduction in price. The offer indicated that it was for "immediate acceptance." The terms were "cash, pick up by your carrier at our loading dock and not later than March 15." It also indicated that the terms of the offer were not subject to variance. The letter did not arrive until March 10, and Conduit's letter accepting the offer was not mailed until March 12. The letter of acceptance indicated that Conduit would take the entire lot, would pay in accordance with the usual terms (2/10, net/30), and would pick up the goods on March 16. Which of the following best describes the legal relationship of the parties?

A. The different terms of the acceptance constituted a rejection of the offer.
B. Because both parties were merchants and the changes in the acceptance were not material, there is a valid contract based on the different terms.
C. The different terms of the acceptance are to be construed as proposals for changes in the contract.
D. The acceptance was not timely; hence, no contract was formed.

Answer 1

The acceptance was not timely, hence no contract was formed.

Step-by-step explanation:

The legal relationship between Almovar Electronics and Conduit Sales & Service Company can be described as follows:

According to the terms of the offer sent by Almovar Electronics, it stated that it was for "immediate acceptance" and that the terms were "cash, pick up by your carrier at our loading dock and not later than March 15." However, the letter of acceptance from Conduit Sales & Service Company was not mailed until March 12, indicating that it was not timely. Therefore, there was no contract formed between the parties.

The correct answer is D. The acceptance was not timely; hence, no contract was formed.