Kendall Gardner agreed to buy a specially built shaving mill from B&C Shavings. He planned to use the mill to produce wood shavings for poultry processors. B&C faxed an invoice to Gardner reflecting a purchase price of $86,200, with a 30 percent down payment and the "balance due before shipment." Gardner paid the down payment. B&C finished the mill and wrote Gardner a letter telling him to "pay the balance due or you will lose the down payment." By then, Gardner had lost his customers for the wood shavings, could not pay the balance due, and asked for the return of his down payment. Did these parties have an enforceable contract under the Statute of Frauds? Explain. Miller, Roger LeRoy. Cengage Advantage Books: Business Law Today, The Essentials: Text and Summarized Cases (p. 324). Cengage Learning. Kindle Edition.

This is not an enforceable contract, because they is no agreement of what will happen if any of the party failed to fullfil it's obligation in the contract agreement.

Explanation: An enforceable contract is a legal agreement between two or more parties, which is backed by the law.

The agreement between Kendall Gardner and B&C shavings is not an enforceable contract because it would be defrauding for Kendall Gerdner to loss $25,860 paid to B&C shavings, just because they can't complete it's payment. It will also be unfair to B&C shavings since their have spend it's money to build the shaving mill.

Their contract agreement lacks what should be done if any party failed to fullfil its own part in the agreement.

B&C shavings doesn't have the right to withhold Kendall Gardner down payment, as it's not agreed in their contract.

c

explanation:

well obviously you must be dumb if you dont noe dat

answer; communities of interest; i believe this is correct, plz check first good luck;