Question

On March 1, Moe Mechanic agreed to repair Ohner’s machine for $5,000, to be paid on completion of the work. On March 15, before the work was completed, Mechanic sent a letter to Ohner with a copy to Jones, telling Ohner to pay the $5,000 to Jones, who was one of Mechanic’s creditors. Mechanic then completed the work. Which of the following, if true, would best serve Ohner as a defense in an action brought by Jones for $5,000?

	A. Jones was incapable of performing Mechanic’s work.
	B. Mechanic did not perform in a workmanlike manner.
	C. On March 1, Mechanic promised Ohner that he would not assign the contract.
	D. Jones was not the intended beneficiary of the Ohner-Mechanic contract.

Answer 1

Answer) There are 2 things to be considered here,first is Ohner signed a contract with Mechanic and not with Jones and second payment was to be paid on completion of work,now in this case Mechanic sent a letter to Ohner before work was completed to pay his/her creditor Jones,given that work was not completed and contract was between Ohner-Mechanic and Jones was not involved in the same contract,Ohner had no obligation to pay to Jones,in fact Ohner was supposed to pay to Mechanic once the work was completed,so Jones could not have been intended beneficiary of Ohner-Mechanic contract.,this is reflected in option d) Jones was not the intended beneficiary of the Ohner-Mechanic contract,so option d) Jones was not the intended beneficiary of the Ohner-Mechanic contract is correct option.

Answer is complete.Thank you!