Which would you say is the correct-legal stance


D. Wayans Automotive called C. E. Reeves Automotive Supplier

D. Wayans Automotive called C. E. Reeves Automotive Suppliers and ordered a case of windshield wipers for $4,000 with the terms of the contract/order being 3/10, n/30 FOB Shipping Point.

The case of wipers were shipped and neither company paid for shipping insurance on the items. Two days later as the wipers were being transported through town the delivery truck was involved in an automobile accident and subsequently caught fire with all the contents inside being destroyed.

Upon finding that his wipers were among those in the accident, Wayans called Reeves and demanded that Reeves replace their lost wipers. Which would you say is the correct/legal stance that Reeves could take concerning this sticky situation?

A. Reeves is obligated to ship another case of wipers or credit Wayan's account because ownership had not legally changed hands yet.

B. Wayans is obligated to compensate the shipper for the loss of their truck as their delivery put them on the route, and subsequent collision course.

C. Wayans is out of luck, as ownership of the wipers was transferred when the package was given to the courier.

D. Reeve is obligated to ship another cash of wipers because the accident wasn't caused by Wayans.

 

Request for Solution File

Ask an Expert for Answer!!
Business Economics: Which would you say is the correct-legal stance
Reference No:- TGS028227

Expected delivery within 24 Hours