Conscionable or Not

643 Words2 Pages

An important factor in contracts is that each side be aware of their responsibilities and rights under the agreement. As long as both parties know the terms of the contract it can be assumed that the contract will be impartial, or at least to the point that the contract is agreeable. This is essential for a contract to be enforceable. One defense available to attempt to void a contract is that the contract was unconscionable. Unconscionability in contracts is defined as giving one party, generally the one that drafts the contract, unreasonable and favorable conditions. In order for a contract to be deemed unconscionable it must be determined that no reasonable person would agree to the terms and conditions present in the contract. In the Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co. case, Williams purchases multiple items and agreed to pay them off all simultaneously, as if it was one purchase. Once Williams defaulted, the company tried to repossess all of the items as none of them were paid off in full. Williams’ case argued that the contract was unconscionable and that the store was well aware that Williams’ annual salary was $2,616. Regardless of Williams’ financial situation, I believe that this contract should be enforceable as the agreement is not unconscionable.
First of all I do not think that it is the store’s responsibility to determine if Williams can pay for the items he purchased on credit. This responsibility can be traced to the credit card company issuing Williams a credit limit he could not afford. If Williams purchased the items on store credit then the responsibility can be placed solely on Williams. Williams should be aware of how much Williams can afford to spend. Williams should also have waited to purchase addi...

... middle of paper ...

... with adequate funds to make the payments would have no issue with the payment plan provided by the contract. Since some reasonable consumers would have no problem with the payment plan provided by the contract, the contract should not deemed unconscionable, and thus should be enforceable.
In the Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co. case the contract should remain enforceable because the financial responsibility of the consumer should fall on the consumer alone. Williams should not have purchased more items than Williams could afford. The contract was not overly bias favoring Walker-Thomas Furniture Co., and a reasonable consumer would agree to the terms and conditions of the contract, therefore the contract was not unconscionable. The contract between Williams and Walker-Thomas Furniture should be enforceable, the defense of unconscionability is not applicable.

More about Conscionable or Not

Open Document