Dominique wanted a new building for her business. She obtained a bid of $10,000 to tear down
Question:
Dominique wanted a new building for her business. She obtained a bid of $10,000 to tear down her old building and another bid of $90,000 to replace it with a new one. Having only limited cash available, Dominique inquired with Hardcash about a $100,000 loan. After reviewing the plans for the project, Hardcash in a signed writing offered to lend Dominique $100,000 secured by a mortgage on the property and repayable over ten years in equal monthly installments at 10% annual interest. Dominique did not respond to Hardcash right away, but she promptly accepted the demolition bid and the old building was removed. Before Dominique responded to Hardcash, Hardcash emailed her to say that he could no longer offer the loan to her. Despite diligent efforts, Dominique was unable to obtain a loan from any other source.
Does Dominique have a cause of action against Hardcash?
Dominique wanted a new building for her business. She obtained a bid of $10,000 to tear down her old building and another bid of $90,000 to replace it with a new one. Having only limited cash available, Dominique inquired with Hardcash about a $100,000 loan. After reviewing the plans for the project, Hardcash in a signed writing offered to lend Dominique $100,000 secured by a mortgage on the property and repayable over ten years in equal monthly installments at 10% annual interest. Dominique did not respond to Hardcash right away, but she promptly accepted the demolition bid and the old building was removed. Before Dominique responded to Hardcash, Hardcash emailed her to say that he could no longer offer the loan to her. Despite diligent efforts, Dominique was unable to obtain a loan from any other source.
Does Dominique have a cause of action against Hardcash?
- Yes, because her reliance on Hardcash's promise was substantial, reasonable, and foreseeable.
- Yes, because by having the building demolished, she accepted Hardcash's offer to make the loan.
- No, because Hardcash did not retain any benefit provided by Dominique unjustly.
- No, because Dominique's inability to obtain a loan from any other source demonstrated that the project lacked the financial soundness that was a constructive condition to Hardcash's performance.