Quote:
Originally Posted by Kayso2
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Are you claiming a painter who is contracted to paint a house can stop halfway through and be owed a portion of the money? Like an unjust enrichment claim? That might have merit, especially if the painter completely painted a portion of the home ie. the complete exterior, or the complete downstairs, leaving no section as can be reasonably divided only partially painted.
Defendant did get a complete earring. But, I'd argue that fulfillment of second hoop is actually worth twice as much as the first. Either of the drops will suffice for the first earring. But once Buyer get his first earring you've limited the Buyer's chances for completion as the earring Buyer still needs is effectively twice as rare.
Assuming equal drop rates, perhaps there is an unjust enrichment claim. I find for the petitioner in the amount of 6,666p, 6g, 6s, 6c.
|
Exactly. I also agree that the amount is owed is not necessarily half (and almost certainly much less than half). On principle of the law, however, the purchaser cannot keep the earring and pay absolutely nothing.
At the very least, I would argue that the seller is entitled to the time he spent to farm the first earring not to exceed the market value of one earring and not to exceed half the original contract price of two earrings. I'd suggest 5k pp is a reasonable price to settle the issue and let both parties move on.
If the seller wants his full payment he needs to provide the second earring...and even that is probably impossible considering how badly the relationship has soured at this point unless they both agree to it (including a time of delivery for the second ring).
my advice, counselor, settle for 5k pp and put it to bed.