From: Andrew_MacFady~cribcor.com Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 11:32:24 -0500 Subject: Article 2 of the universal commercial code...(federal) LONG, DULL BORING, BUT NOT AS MUCH AS COMB MATERIAL PROPERTIES
=A7 2-327. Special Incidents of Sale on Approval and Sale or Return. (1) Under a sale on approval unless otherwise agreed
(a) although the goods are identified to the contract the risk of loss and the title do not pass to the buyer until acceptance; and (b) use of the goods consistent with the purpose of trial is not acceptance but failure seasonably to notify the seller of election to return the goods is acceptance, and if the goods conform to the contract acceptance of any part is acceptance of the whole; and (c) after due notification of election to return, the return is at the seller's risk and expense but a merchant buyer must follow any reasonable instructions. (2) Under a sale or return unless otherwise agreed
(a) the option to return extends to the whole or any commercial unit of the goods while in substantially their original condition, but must be exercised seasonably; and (b) the return is at the buyer's risk and expense.
=A7 2-606. What Constitutes Acceptance of Goods. (1) Acceptance of goods occurs when the buyer
(a) after a reasonable opportunity to inspect the goods signifies to the seller that the goods are conforming or that he will take or retain them in spite of their non-conformity; or (b) fails to make an effective rejection (subsection (1) of Section 2-602), but such acceptance does not occur until the buyer has had a reasonable opportunity to inspect them; or (c) does any act inconsistent with the seller's ownership; but if such act is wrongful as against the seller it is an acceptance only if ratified by him. (2) Acceptance of a part of any commercial unit is acceptance of that entire unit.
=A7 2-613. Casualty to Identified Goods. Where the contract requires for its performance goods identified when the contract is made, and the goods suffer casualty without fault of either party before the risk of loss passes to the buyer, or in a proper case under a "no arrival, no sale" term (Section 2-324) then
(a) if the loss is total the contract is avoided; and (b) if the loss is partial or the goods have so deteriorated as no longer to conform to the contract the buyer may nevertheless demand inspection and at his option either treat the contract as avoided or accept the goods with due allowance from the contract price for the deterioration or the deficiency in quantity but without further right against the seller.
Perhaps some of our more astute legal Harp-ler's could elaborate on the legal jargon contained hearin, As I read it a merchant could bar a customer from playing a harp on any of these grounds. the first part of the article states that >> use of the goods consistent with the purpose of trial is not acceptance but failure seasonably to notify the seller >of election to return the goods is acceptance, and if the goods conform to the contract acceptance of any part is >acceptance of the whole; So you must notify the seller of your intent to return the harp, but then the statute reads >>after due notification of election to return, the return is at the seller's risk and expense but a merchant buyer must follow any reasonable instructions. And I think that any merchant could effectively argue that the instructions given in regards to not putting the harp in your mouth is reasonable, if for no other reason than he/she feels that it would deteriorate the harps value. If this is the case this might explain while some music stores allow other instruments to be practiced..it is up to the seller, it is their liability, and they can choose to give instructions to not play an instrument or they can let you try it. I think that if this is the mysteriously refferenced law I would be surprised. Perhaps music store folklore was born out of need or desire to not bother letting someone try a $20.00 instrument, but to allow one to try a $500. one. At anyrate the specific law may not exist in regards to harps but the rights of the seller are protected in regards to this type of behavior by the universal commercial code. Bill does this satisfy? if not hopefuly it will spurn more lighthearted debate And Glen...I only spent about 15-20 minutes researching online at lunch...in my book not to much time to invest in supporting ones claims.
