The world’s Largest Sharp Brain Virtual Experts Marketplace Just a click Away
Levels Tought:
University
| Teaching Since: | Apr 2017 |
| Last Sign in: | 442 Weeks Ago, 3 Days Ago |
| Questions Answered: | 9562 |
| Tutorials Posted: | 9559 |
bachelor in business administration
Polytechnic State University Sanluis
Jan-2006 - Nov-2010
CPA
Polytechnic State University
Jan-2012 - Nov-2016
Professor
Harvard Square Academy (HS2)
Mar-2012 - Present
Carolyn Murphy, a welfare recipient with very limited education and with four minor children, responded to an advertisement that offered the opportunity to purchase televisions without a deposit or credit history. She entered into a rent-to-own contract for a twenty-five-inch console color television set that required seventy-eight weekly payments of $16 (a total of $1,248, which was two and one-half times the retail value of the set). Under the contract, the renter could terminate the agreement by returning the television and forfeiting any payments already made. After Murphy had paid $436 on the television, she read a newspaper article criticizing the lease plan. She stopped payment and sued the television company. The television company has attempted to take possession of the set. Decision?
Â
-----------