Issue
The issue is whether there is a valid existing contract between Janice and offeror B and offeror C.
Rule
Article 2 of the Uniform Civil Code and Postal Acceptance Rule
Analysis
Janice received offers from offeror A, offeror B, and offeror C regarding the sale of her house. The first offer was $1 million, the second offer was $1.25 million, and the third offer was $1.35 million. Offeror B attaches a personal note that expresses their desire to purchase the house since they are a family moving to Seattle from Europe. Even though Janice indicates her willingness to sell the house to offeror B, she does not accept their offer since offeror C provides a better bid. However, the valid acceptance of the offer was not properly communicated to offeror C due to technical issues. Article 2 of the UCC states that the offer should be valid approved based on the postal rule. Signing the contract on paper without official communication of acceptance does not make the contract binding.
Conclusion
There is no binding contract between Janice and offeror C since she did not communicate any acceptance of the bid from the offeror. Therefore, the recommendation to Janice is to accept the offer from offeror B and communicate the offer through fax or any other channel. This would imply that the contract acceptance is valid and would be in compliance with the UCC regulations and the postal acceptance rule. Accepting this contract would not be a breach of contract since there is no official communication that implied the acceptance of the other offers.
Comments