Duke argued that he had not committed fraud because perry


Duke decided to sell his car. The car's muffler had a large hole in it, and as a result, the care made a loud noise. Before showing the car to potential buyers, Duke patched the hole with muffler tape to quiet it. Perry bought the car after test driving it. He later discovered the faulty muffler and sought to avoid the contract, claiming fraud. Duke argued that he had not committed fraud because Perry had not asked about the muffler and Duke had made no representation of fact concerning it. Is Duke correct? Explain your response.

Request for Solution File

Ask an Expert for Answer!!
Operation Management: Duke argued that he had not committed fraud because perry
Reference No:- TGS02904874

Expected delivery within 24 Hours