Answer:
Option B, Jamal is entitled to revoke acceptance because he took back the motorcycle after the seller's assurance that the nonconformity would be cured.
Explanation:
The primary purpose of purchasing goods is to obtain conforming goods of the desired quality. Occasionally, the seller delivers non-conforming goods, goods that fail to meet the contractual obligation (obligations include: seller's description, statements promises...). In situations like this the buyer may revoke his acceptance if already accepted or reject the delivery upon discovery.
If delivery is already accepted, acceptance may be revoked;
* On the reasonable grounds that its non-conformity would be cured and it has not be cured.
* Without discovery of such non-conformity if his acceptance was reasonably induced either by the difficulty of delivery before acceptance or by the seller's assurances.
Therefore, option B best suits the question. Under these circumstances, Jamal is entitled to revoke his acceptance because the he took back the motorcycle after the seller's assurance that the non-conformity would be cured which was not, even after several complaints.
I think the answer is B: a person with a credit score of 760 with a small amount of debt who has had steady employment for many years.
<span>A benefit that is sought by an interest group and that once achieved cannot be denied to nonmembers is called a free rider. The free rider problem is created from market failure because people take advantage of being able to use common resources or collective goods without being able to pay for </span>them.
