Question

Vicki entered into a written contract to buy a car from Valley Motors. During the negotiations, the sales representative said that the car had a two-year full warranty. The written contract included a provision that stated, "This writing is the full and final expression of the parties' agreement; anything said before signing or while signing is irrelevant." The written contract did not include a warranty. Two months after Vicki took delivery of the car, she discovered that the transmission needed to be replaced. Vicki claimed that it was covered by the full warranty. Will Vicki be able to present evidence as to the sales representative's statements concerning the warranty?

Answer 1

Answer:

The answer is NO, SHE WON'T.

Explanation:

This is because  according to the statements, there was a clause in the written agreement that Vicki entered into that, "This writing is the full and final expression of the parties' agreement; anything said before signing or while signing is irrelevant." Thus, the written contract did not include a warranty even though the Sales Representative during selling the vehicle stated verbally that a 2-year warranty was on the vehicle.  Even if she has a recorded evidence of the Sales Representative statements, since the statements are not included in the written contract, then the evidence may be classified as null and of no essence.

Answer 2

Answer:

No she won't.

Explanation:

Vicki will not be able to present evidence as to the sales representative's statements concerning the warranty that "This writing is the full and final expression of the parties' agreement; anything said before signing or while signing is irrelevant." thereby excluding the car's warranty.

Hence, any evidence of the discussion of the warranty would most likely be excluded by the parol evidence rule.