On May 7, Roy, a minor, a resident of Smithton, purchased an automobile from Royal Motors, Inc., for \($12,750\) in cash. On the same day, he bought a motor scooter from Marks, also a minor, for \($1,750\) and paid him in full. On June 5, two days before attaining his majority, Roy disaffirmed the contracts and offered to return the car and the motor scooter to the respective sellers. Royal Motors and Marks each refused the offers.

On June 16, Roy brought separate appropriate actions against Royal Motors and Marks to recover the purchase price of the car and the motor scooter. By agreement on July 30, Royal Motors accepted the automobile. Royal then filed a counterclaim against Roy for the reasonable rental value of the car between June 5 and July 30. The car was not damaged during this period. Royal knew that Roy lived twenty-five miles from his place of employment in Smithton and that he probably used the car, as he did, for transportation. What is the decision as to

a. Roy’s action against Royal Motors, Inc., and its counterclaim against Roy; and

b. Roy’s action against Marks?