The Smith family is moving to Little Rock because of a job relocation. They decide to purchase a home near Ms. Smith's office which is in a part of town that was established in the mid-1980's. When they looked at the house, they noticed the living room had carpet that appeared to be fastened to the floor. An offer was made and accepted, the transaction closed and the Smiths moved into their new home and discovered they had no living room carpet because it had been removed. The Smith family called the broker who had sold them the house and complained. The broker called the former owners, the Martins, who had moved to another city, to ask why they had removed the living room carpet. They told the broker that they "removed the carpet because it was not tacked to the floor and they had every right to remove it". They explained that "the carpet had only been tacked to the door threshold area to stop anyone from falling but it was not fastened anywhere else in the room and it was not a permanent installation". They had never intended to sell it with the house. Results: The Smiths did not have the carpet in the living room they believed should have belonged to them; the Martins refused to pay for carpet replacement and the broker had very dissatisfied customers. Question: Is there any way the broker can keep the goodwill and retain a customer? What would the broker do? What could be done in the future to stop this kind of misunderstanding?