USA Consumer Law Case A In the given case, it cannot be denied that there is an outright misrepresentation on the part of the seller of the house by not revealing to Casey, the consumer, that there was a murder that transpired in the house. It is true that while something that Casey does not know will not her, but under all the given circumstances, she was able to find the truth why the house was sold at a lower price than what is supposed to be the standard pricing in the market. Such an act of lowering the price of the house is an apparent manifestation that the seller of the house wanted to persuade Casey or any other buyer for that matter to buy the house. Within the long hours of chatting and discussing the possibility of buying the house, the seller of the house failed to disclose the truth about the murder. As a result when Casey lived in the house, she has been haunted by the thought that someone has been murdered in the house where she resides. Hence, upon all prevailing circumstances, it can be said that since there is misrepresentation, Casey could ask for the reimbursement of the money she paid and leave the house upon settlement. This is true because upon knowledge of the murder, Casey could have not bought the house. Case B Aside from the reimbursement of the money that she Casey has paid to the house seller, she could also claim payment for moral damages that she has experienced such as fright, mental anguish, moral suffering, and even serious anxiety brought about by living in a house where a murder has transpired. It cannot be disregarded that there are nights that Casey might think and feel that the perpetrator is just around the corner and waiting to attack her as well. Question 3 It is important to note that private enforcement of law entails the identity of the violators. It cannot be denied that most of the times that the victims know their perpetrators or their offenders. In this case, since they have the knowledge that will lead to the identification of the criminals, they can easily file a case for law enforcement. The basic idea underlying is the fact that the criminals know by heart who committed a crime against them. On the other hand, public enforcement of law can be used when the victims do not necessarily possess knowledge of who committed the crimes against them or when there is no identification of the identity of the criminals. For example, in the case of breach of contract, the victim can easily pinpoint before the court of justice the criminal and the case being presented on a private enforcement of law. However, on the public enforcement, the society will still have to undertake a grueling process of detecting the offenders Question 4 Identity theft is one of the growing problems in the whole world today because of the increasing number of victims. When an identity is stolen, a fraud can be committed and a person whose identity has been stolen needs to prove innocence. By failing a dispute over the matters that have been affected by identity theft, Casey can recover her loss and will be given a chance to defend her case. However, it must be remembered that once knowledge of the identity theft has been acquired, one must automatically and immediately report the same in order to prevent further complications and fraudulent acts. Unless the identity of the thief is made, there is no legal case that can be filed. Precautions and solutions such as closing of accounts and other measures must be made right away.
Most popular orders