Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...mity would be cured and it has not been seasonably cured; or (b) Without discovery of such non-conformity if his acceptance was reasonably induced either by the difficulty of discovery before acceptance or by the seller’s assurances. Fla.Stat.Ann. § 672.608(1). The revocation “must occur within a reasonable time after the buyer discovers or should have discovered the ground for it and before any substantial change in condition of the goods which is not caused by their own defects.” Fla.Stat.Ann. § 672.608(2)....

...We hold as a matter of law that XSC’s purported revocation was not effective since it was made after substantial changes in the condition of the goods. “[T]he buyer may not revoke his acceptance \f the goods have materially deteriorated except by reason of their own defects.” Fla.Stat.Ann. § 672.608, Official Comment 6....

...its nonconformity would be cured and it has not been seasonably cured, or without discovery of such nonconformity if her or his acceptance was reasonably induced either by the difficulty of discovery before acceptance or by the seller's assurances." Section 672.608, Fla....

...evoke their acceptance of the vehicle, but the dealer refused to accept its return. Appellants filed suit against Frank Griffin and American Credit Corporation (hereafter AMCC), assignee of the lease agreement, seeking revocation of acceptance under section 672.608, Florida Statutes (1983) (section 2-608, Uniform Commercial Code), and under 15 U.S.C.A....

...ell as consequential damages. The action based on the Magnuson-Moss Act also claimed statutory attorney's fees. The trial court granted summary judgment on the sole ground that the subject transaction is a closed-end lease, not a sale, and that both section 672.608 and the Magnuson-Moss Act apply only in the case of a sale....

...o the lessor or its assignee at the end of the forty-eight month term with no option to purchase, and the express provision in the lease that the transaction was a lease only and the lessor remained owner of the vehicle. The court ruled that neither section 672.608 nor the Magnuson-Moss Act applies to a closed-end lease where there is no present or anticipated transfer of title from the supplier to *149 the consumer because title had to pass for a sale to have occurred. The appealed order states that plaintiffs neither bought nor contracted to buy goods within the meaning of section 672.103, Florida Statutes (1983), and that section 672.608, Florida Statutes (1983), is "inapplicable to a pure lease contract where the lessees have no right to purchase the goods at any time in the future." The trial court noted the decision in Capital Associates, Inc....

...subject to the prohibition against unconscionable clauses found in section 672.302. The trial court distinguished Capital Associates because section 672.302 is not limited by its terms to a sale involving the relationship of buyer and seller, as is section 672.608....

...the lease agreement operated to defeat appellants' right to relief, saying the latter would be a defensive issue. The critical issues on this appeal are whether the lease transaction shown by this record is, as a matter of law, not subject to either section 672.608 or the Magnuson-Moss Act because the transaction did not amount to a sale transaction within the meaning of those two statutes....

...The facts before us present a very appealing case for extending the provisions of both statutes to this lease transaction, but for the reasons hereafter discussed we believe this is more properly a legislative function and affirm. UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE The UCC provisions for revocation of acceptance contained in section 672.608 read in part: (1) The buyer may revoke his acceptance of a lot or commercial unit whose nonconformity substantially impairs its value to him if he has accepted it: (a) On the reasonable assumption that its nonconformity would be cured...

...We have no doubt that appellant Sellers held the same expectations when he leased this vehicle from the dealer. Since Florida recognizes a strong public policy of liberally construing the provisions of the UCC to provide meaningful remedies to purchasers of defective new cars, we consider the construction of section 672.608 in the context of the transaction before us to determine whether the remedy provided under that section may be made available to appellants. Appellants argue that section 672.608 is applicable to this lease transaction because section 672.102, defining the scope of application of chapter 672 governing sales, provides that "unless the context otherwise requires, this chapter applies to transactions in goods," and appellants' lease of this vehicle was a "transaction in goods" as so defined. By its express terms, chapter 672 applies to "sales" and section 672.608 applies to transactions involving a "buyer" and a "seller." Section 672.103 defines "buyer" as "a person who buys or contracts to buy goods," and defines "seller" as "a person who sells or contracts to sell goods." Section 672.106(1)...

...mposed by law on the manufacturer and the dealer as its authorized representative. Comparing the facts in this case with the factors discussed above, it appears that some suggest this transaction should be characterized as a sale and thus subject to section 672.608, but others indicate the transaction is only a lease and not a sale....

...Nevertheless we must leave this solution to the legislature. The section of the code involved in Capital Associates, Inc. v. Hudgens, 455 So.2d 651, section 672.302, prohibiting unconscionable clauses, is not expressly limited to a buyer and seller as is section 672.608....

...erred in ruling the warranty notice provision was a limitation of remedy provision pursuant to Section 672.719, Florida Statutes; and (5) whether the trial court erred in finding there was not a showing of substantial impairment of value pursuant to Section 672.608, Florida Statutes....

...ontract in making those repairs. We affirm in part and reverse in part. As first point for review the Parsons allege the trial court erred in requiring them to make an election of remedies at the pre-trial conference. The Comment to U.C.C. § 2-608 (Section 672.608, Florida Statutes) explains the change in a buyer's remedies effected by adoption of the Uniform Commercial Code....

...The UCC remedies include, (1) cancellation — Section 672.612; (2) "cover" and damages for non-delivery — Sections 672.712 and 672.713; (3) specific performance or replevin — Section 672.716; (4) rejection — Section 672.601; (5) revocation of acceptance — Section 672.608; and (6) damages for breach in regard to accepted goods — Section 672.714....

...i.e., the seller purportedly limited the buyer's remedies to the manufacturer's warranty. As fifth point on appeal, the Parsons allege the trial court erred in denying their claim for revocation of acceptance. An action for revocation is governed by Section 672.608, Florida Statutes....

...d the value they would have had if they had been as warranted, unless special circumstances show proximate damages of a different amount. (3) In a proper case any incidental and consequential damages under the next section may also be recovered. [8] § 672.608, Fla. Stat. (1981), provides: 672.608 Revocation of acceptance in whole or in part....

...Section 672.714 expressly provides that a buyer who has accepted goods "may recover as damages for any non-conformity of tender. . . (emphasis added). The district court's instructions correctly stated the law in this regard. Defendant's argument seems to be based on Fla.Stat.Ann. § 672.608, which provides under certain circumstances that "[t]he buyer may revoke his acceptance of a lot or commercial unit whose non-conformity substantially impairs its value to him." 14 However, plaintiffs in this action did not seek to "revoke" their acceptance of the cattle....

...all or any part of the damages resulting from any breach of the contract from any part of the price still due under the same contract." In discussing the right of rejection and the concomitant right of revocation of acceptance provided by Fla. Stat. § 672.608, White and Summers, Uniform Commercial Code § 8-1, states: "At the outset one should understand the significance of a self-help remedy which permits the buyer to return the goods to the seller, (that is, rejection or revocation of acceptance)....

...The parties challenge various rulings of the trial court during the course of the lawsuit. We affirm each of the rulings except the denial of Griffin's motion for a directed verdict on the count alleging Smith's right to revoke his acceptance under section 672.608, Florida Statutes (1987)....

...ccessful, Smith filed suit against Griffin, Volkswagen, and others. The suit resulted in a jury verdict against Volkswagen for breach of Volkswagen's warranties, and against Griffin on various theories, including revocation of acceptance pursuant to section 672.608, Florida Statutes. Griffin argues that the trial court erred in denying its motion for a directed verdict on the count alleging Smith's right to revoke his acceptance. Section 672.608(1) provides: The buyer may revoke his acceptance of a lot or commercial unit whose nonconformity substantially impairs its value to him if he has accepted it: (a) On the reasonable assumption that its nonconformity would be cured and...

...1987 Volkswagen Golf GT model. In so holding, the majority has accepted the dealer's argument that, because it disclaimed all warranties, express or implied, the dealer made no promises as to conformity, and, absent the nonconformity required under Section 672.608(1), Florida Statutes (1987) (Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) § 2-608(1)), revocation cannot be available as a remedy....

...eceptive and Unfair Trade Practice Act violations (Sections 501.201-.213, Florida Statutes (1987)); Count IV, violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C.S. §§ 2301-2312 (Law. Co-op. 1982)); Count V, revocation of acceptance, pursuant to Section 672.608, Florida Statutes (1987) (UCC § 2.608); and Count VI, violation of Florida's Motor Vehicle Warranty Enforcement Act (the "Lemon Law," Sections 681.10-.111, Florida Statutes (1987))....

...Notwithstanding a clause generally disclaiming all warranties, such clause has no effect on a buyer's right to revoke acceptance, if the goods sold can otherwise be shown not to conform to the contract, and the buyer is able to meet the remaining requirements of section 672.608 (UCC § 2-608)....

...We reject this contention. First, rescission and damages are not necessarily inconsistent remedies. See Armbruster, 437 So.2d at 727 ("Rescission of the escrowed transaction and recovery of damages against the escrowee are not necessarily inconsistent remedies."). Second, § 672.608 (comment 1), Fla....

...esentations which are covered in or contradicted by a later written agreement. Hillcrest Pac. Corp. v. Yamamura, 727 So.2d 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). [1] The Giallos also alleged a claim for revocation of acceptance under the Uniform Commercial Code, section 672.608, Florida Statutes (2002), which provides: Revocation of acceptance in whole or in part.— (1) The buyer may revoke her or his acceptance of a lot or commercial unit whose nonconformity substantially impairs its value to her or him if...

...McCormick's argument on appeal focuses upon its contentions that the transaction was a "no-warranty" sale and, in addition, that the evidence was insufficient to establish that the bulldozer was in such defective condition when purchased as to justify Johnson's revocation of acceptance under the Uniform Commercial Code, section 672.608, Florida Statutes....

...The question then arises: Upon what basis did the court find that the bulldozer was "nonconforming," thus giving Johnson the right to revoke his acceptance of the machine? The Uniform Commercial Code, as adopted in Florida, provides that a buyer may revoke acceptance of goods under certain conditions, as follows: 672.608 Revocation of acceptance in whole or in part....

...after seasonable receipt of the demand does turn over control the buyer is so barred. (6) The provisions of subsections (3), (4) and (5) apply to any obligation of a buyer to hold the seller harmless against infringement or the like (s.672.312(3)). Section 672.608 establishes when a buyer may revoke acceptance in whole or in part: (1) The buyer may revoke her or his acceptance of a lot or commercial unit whose nonconformity substantially impairs its value to her or him if she or he has accepted...

...Crabtree, Jr., P.A., Satsuma, for appellee. SHARP, Judge. Central Florida Antenna Service, Inc. appeals from a judgment wherein the trial court rescinded the sale of a satellite television system to appellee, Crabtree. The court granted this equitable remedy without consideration of section 672.608, Florida Statutes (1985), the provision in Florida's UCC which governs rescission in this case. Neither the final judgment nor the evidence indicate compliance with section 672.608....

...[3] Rescission should not be granted if damages for breach of contract or warranty are available. [4] Here, there was no showing that a damage award based on the difference between the value of the defective system and the value of the system purchased would not have sufficed to make Crabtree "whole." However, section 672.608, Florida Statutes (1985) entitled "Revocation of Acceptance," is controlling. [5] Article Two of the Code impacts on this case, whether or not the lower court or the parties were aware of it because the transaction falls within its scope and definition. [6] Rescission in the context of this case is reworded by the UCC in section 672.608, Florida Statutes (1985) as follows: 672.608 Revocation of acceptance in whole or in part....

...if he had rejected them. (Emphasis added). In this case, based on the stipulated record, Crabtree accepted the system by keeping it for in excess of a year, and paying for it in full after it was made to function to his satisfaction. [7] Thereafter, section 672.608 limited and controlled his ability to revoke his acceptance....

...It appears that breach of warranty or breach of contract issues were tried below, although not pled, and that Crabtree may be entitled to a money judgment on those grounds. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment because there was no basis upon which to find a "revocation of acceptance" under section 672.608....

...Crabtree then filed suit seeking to rescind the contract of sale. The trial court granted Crabtree's claim for rescission and the fifth district reversed, finding that Crabtree had failed to revoke his acceptance of the system within a reasonable time as required by the U.C.C. provision codified under section 672.608(2), Florida Statutes (1985)....

...[2] While Wellcraft finally did make an attempt to correct the boat's defects, Bair never indicated that he was satisfied with Wellcraft's repairs. Therefore, under the facts of this case, we cannot say that Bair's two-year delay in revoking acceptance of the boat was not a reasonable time as required under section 672.608....

...Lastly, Bair argues that he is entitled to incidental and consequential damages, including insurance costs and finance charges, to the extent that these expenses were occasioned by Wellcraft's failure to cure the boat's defects, thereby impeding its sale. Section 672.608(3), Florida Statutes (1985) provides that "[a] buyer who so revokes has the same rights and duties with regard to the goods involved as if he had rejected them." Under the remedy provision section 672.715(1) Bair is entitled to recover incidental damages which "include expenses reasonably incurred in ......

...We further direct the trial court to determine the portion of insurance and finance costs Bair was compelled to pay as a result of defects which prevented the sale of the boat, and to award those sums to Bair as consequential and incidental damages. CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur. NOTES [1] Section 672.608, Florida Statutes (1985), provides in pertinent part: (2) Revocation of acceptance must occur within a reasonable time after the buyer discovers or should have discovered the ground for it and before any substantial change in condition of the goods which is not caused by their own defects. It is not effective until the buyer notifies the seller of it. [2] The court's decision in Ford Motor, 671 F.2d at 1117, was grounded upon section 85-2-608, Arkansas Statutes Annotated, which contains language identical to that of section 672.608....

...Whinng, 5 U.C.C.Rptr. 357 (1968). 9. Blakey failed to make an effective revocation of his acceptance of the engines. Under the Code, Blakey was required to revoke his acceptance within a reasonable time after he discovered grounds for such revocation. § 672.608 states: Revocation of acceptance must occur within a reasonable time after the buyer discovers or should have discovered the grounds for it and before any substantial change in condition of the goods which is not caused by their own defects....

...After delivering a "Notice of Revocation of Acceptance" to appellants, appellees moved out and filed this action to recover the purchase price paid plus interest. Judgment was entered allowing them to revoke acceptance of the mobile home and damages were awarded in the sum of $5,226.66. This appeal ensued. Section 672.608, F.S....

...e buyer's purchase of the goods in the first place. If such purpose is substantially frustrated or interfered with by "non-conformities," then, we think the "value" of the goods has been "substantially impaired" as to him within the contemplation of § 672.608, supra....

...I think, however, that the majority's analysis of the dealer's right to setoff should be further expanded. Since Kuntz relied upon the remedy provided in the Uniform Commercial Code, the right to revoke acceptance of the goods purchased, as provided under UCC 2-608 (Section 672.608, Florida Statutes), Kuntz now argues that the remedies furnished the seller under the code, set out in Sections 672.701-672.710, Florida Statutes, do not provide the seller with the right of setoff for use or depreciation where there is a justifiable revocation of acceptance....

...equitable principles apply, citing Orange Motors of Coral Gables, Inc. v. Dade County Dairies, Inc., 258 So.2d 319 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972). Orange Motors of course permitted a setoff to an automobile dealer when the buyer sought rescission under the UCC (Section 672.608, Florida Statutes), but unlike the Pavesi decision, Orange Motors did not address the question of whether setoff was an available remedy to a seller under the code....

...Once goods are accepted, the buyer must pay at the contract rate for any goods accepted. § 672.607(1), Fla. Stat. (1985). Acceptance of the goods precludes their subsequent rejection and any return of the goods thereafter must be by way of revocation of acceptance under section 672.608, Florida Statutes (1985)....

...from making a claim for breach of warranty. Central Florida Antenna Service v. Crabtree, 503 So.2d 1351 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); United States Fidelity and Guaranty v. North American Steel Corporation, 335 So.2d 18 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976). See §§ 672.313, 672.608, 672.714, and 672.717, Fla....

...Thus, even though there was no rejection or revocation of acceptance, B.P. should have been allowed to amend its counterclaim for damages for nonconforming goods. REVERSED AND REMANDED. COBB, J., and NORRIS, W.A., Jr., Associate Judge, concur. NOTES [1] Section 672.608 no longer speaks of "rescission", a term capable of ambiguous application....

...es justifiedly and timely revoked his acceptance. Gulfwind appeals this order. Before Jones could legally revoke acceptance, she had to show that the boat was "nonconforming," and that the nonconformity "substantially impaired" the boat's value. See § 672.608, Fla....

...The trial court entered judgment against Gulfwind for the purchase price of $148,525 and prejudgment interest of $36,296, for a total of $184,821 based on the defective motors. Although one might question the factual support for the judgment on appeal or that the trial court's ruling expands section 672.608 into a general "lemon law," these are not the reasons I dissent....

...tion of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (Chapter 501, Part II), violation of the Magnuson-Moss Federal Warranty Act, violation of the Motor Vehicle Warranty Enforcement Act (Chapter 681), and revocation of acceptance pursuant to section 672.608, Florida Statutes....

...Further, section 501.213 states that the remedies of the Act are in addition to those remedies otherwise available for the same conduct under either state or local law. One of the remedies otherwise available to the appellants in this case was revocation of acceptance under section 672.608, Florida Statutes....

...Mercedes refused her demand. Based on these allegations, Rastaedt pled one count of breach of written warranty pursuant to the MMWA, and sought, among other relief, to revoke her acceptance of the vehicle in accordance with 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (d) and section 672.608, Florida Statutes, and to recover all monies paid for the vehicle....

...the contract. On appeal, the Winterbothams argue that the Alpha Micro hardware is useless without the software and since the court found that the software did not perform satisfactorily, then rescission of the hardware was also warranted. We agree. Section 672.608(1), Florida Statutes (1985) of the Uniform Commercial Code provides as follows: Revocation of acceptance in whole or in part (1) The buyer may revoke his acceptance of a lot or commercial unit whose non-conformity substantially impair...

...ormity if his acceptance was reasonably *1283 induced either by the difficulty of discovery before acceptance or by the seller's assurances. In Barrington Homes of Florida, Inc. v. Kelley, 320 So.2d 841 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975), the court held that, under section 672.608, "value" to the buyer is to be measured by the essential purpose to be served by the buyer's purchase of the goods in the first place....

...urt and the buyers brought the instant petition for writ of common law certiorari. As noted, this action was brought as one for "rescission." The Uniform Commercial Code, while abandoning the term "rescission" in favor of "revocation of acceptance," § 672.608, Fla....

...the following occurred. Appellee Wilson Davis sold a defective truck to appellants which failed the first time it was used for its ultimate purpose. Appellants timely revoked their acceptance of the goods delivered upon discovery of the defect. See section 672.608, Florida Statutes (1981)....

...At that point, Florida’s commercial code permitted TM Wireless to reject the goods, id. § 672.601(1) (“[I]f the goods . . . fail in any respect to conform to the contract, the buyer may . . . reject the whole . . . .”), or revoke its acceptance, id, § 672.608(1) (“The buyer may revoke her or his acceptance of a lot or commercial unit whose nonconformity substantially impairs its value to her or him if she or he has accepted it: (a) On the reasonable assumption that its nonconformity...

effective until the buyer notifies the seller. § 672.608(2), Fla.Stat. See also Central Florida Antenna