Question

Celia is a college student who just took her first trip to Las Vegas. While there, she charged $2,000 on her new credit card. When her credit card statement arrived, she noted that there were $3,000 in charges related to her Las Vegas trip! Horrified, she called the credit card company to dispute the excess charges. The credit card company insisted she had charged $3,000 on the card and Celia insisted she had only charged $2,000 on the card. Finally, Celia and the credit card company agreed that Celia would pay $2,500 as full payment of the credit card. Celia promptly sent them a check for $2,500. The following month, the credit card company billed Celia for the remaining $500! Celia sued, arguing that the credit card company had agreed to accept $2,500 as payment in full. The court agreed and ruled in Celia’s favor, holding that the credit card company and Celia had entered into an accord and satisfaction. But what if the facts of the case were different? Select each set of facts below that could change the outcome of the court’s decision.

Answer 1

Answer:

1)Celia actually did charge $3,000 on her credit card and admitted such to the credit card company, but argued she only had $2,500 in her  bank account to pay off the credit card.

Telling a bank or a credit card company that you do not have enough money top pay right now will not make them forgive the unpaid balance. They might offer you some type of agreement or schedule for you to pay for the remaining balance (in this case $500). A court will never rule in favor of a borrower just because they do not want to pay the whole balance and will not accept a payment schedule.

3) Celia and the credit card company agreed that Celia would pay $2,500 as full payment of the disputed debt, but Celia never paid the  $2,500.

When Celia and the credit card company reached an agreement to settle their dispute, that agreement is binding on both parties. Celia must pay the $2,500 and the credit card company will not charge any more money. But if Celia doesn't make the payment, she is not performing her part and the credit card company can sue her for it, and will probably win.

Explanation:

the options are missing:

1. Celia actually did charge $3,000 on her credit card and admitted such to the credit card company, but argued she only had $2,500 in her  bank account to pay off the credit card.
2. Celia actually did charge $3,000 on her credit card and admitted such to the credit card company. However, Celia had no money, so she  offered the credit card company her car in exchange for full payment of the debt and the credit card company accepted. Celia turned over  title to her car to the credit card company.
3. Celia and the credit card company agreed that Celia would pay $2,500 as full payment of the disputed debt, but Celia never paid the  $2,500.
4. Celia believed she did not charge anything on her credit card during her trip to Las Vegas. The credit card company claims she charged  $3,000 to the card while in Las Vegas.