eLaws | eCases | State of Wisconsin |
 Wisconsin Statutes (Last Updated: January 10, 2017)
 Chapter 402. Uniform Commercial Code — Sales
 SubChapter VI. BREACH, REPUDIATION AND EXCUSE

  Section 402.608. Revocation of acceptance in whole or in part.  

Latest version.
  •  
    (1)  The buyer may revoke the buyer's acceptance of a lot or commercial unit whose nonconformity substantially impairs its value to the buyer if the buyer has accepted it:
    (a) On the reasonable assumption that its nonconformity would be cured and it has not been seasonably cured; or
    (b) Without discovery of such nonconformity if the buyer's acceptance was reasonably induced either by the difficulty of discovery before acceptance or by the seller's assurances.
    (2)  Revocation of acceptance must occur within a reasonable time after the buyer discovers or should have discovered the ground for it and before any substantial change in condition of the goods which is not caused by their own defects. It is not effective until the buyer notifies the seller of it.
    (3)  A buyer who so revokes has the same rights and duties with regard to the goods involved as if the buyer had rejected them.
1991 a. 316 . Sub. (2) provides that a revocation of acceptance must occur within a reasonable time after the buyer discovers a nonconformity, and s. 402.602 (2) (b) requires a buyer who rejects goods to hold the goods for a sufficient time for the seller to remove them. A truck purchaser who used the vehicle for 18 months, then transferred it back to the dealer and sought relief 10 months after the transfer did not reject the vehicle in a timely manner or hold it as required, and was not entitled to relief. Smyser v. Western Star Trucks Corp. 2001 WI App 180 , 247 Wis. 2d 281 , 634 N.W.2d 134 , 00-2482 . When the trial court found that the plaintiff's employees were told by the defendant that a part of a system purchased from the defendant would not work and there was no evidence presented at trial as to any further discussion of additional work, the plaintiff could not reasonably assume that the nonconformity would be cured, making revocation under subs. (1) (a) and (2) unavailable. Viking Packaging Technologies, Inc. v. Vassallo Foods, Inc., 2011 WI App 133 , 337 Wis. 2d 125 , 804 N.W.2d 507 , 10-2067 .