blong4133 wrote:JollyGreenGiant wrote:Can someone explain #1 of MPQ2 Set #6 for me? I'm having trouble seeing why a contract is formed when they increased the price. My original thought was that the silence within 10 days of receiving the letter constituted acceptance and therefore November 15th was the date of contract--but obviously that's not even an option.
This question kind of ticked me off a little.
But I think you're confusing this issue with the merchant's confirmatory memo rule. That's when the merchants create an oral contract and later reduce it to a signed writing and send it to the other. Once it's sent the other has 10 days to object to it or it will be deemed accepted, regardless of whether he even read the letter. That's not the issue in this case, because there was no contract already formed before they started sending letters back and forth. The first letter was an offer from the shoe store to buy shoes, and there was an acceptance from the manufacturer in the second letter but stated a different price. I read this as a battle of the forms question, but apparently they were testing the mailbox rule. I don't think that was that great of a question.
Agreed that the Q sucked. They totally lead you in the direction of the UCC rule regarding non-mirror image acceptance, and then make it nothing more than a Q about the mailbox rule.
