02-0714 Snyder v. Badgerland Mobile Homes, Inc.

Listen to this article

This is so because the contract sufficiently listed the salesman’s name and the address of defendant company, and the start and completion dates were omitted for plaintiffs’ benefit and they have thus failed to prove that they “suffered pecuniary loss” as required by section 100.20(5).

“We conclude that the unambiguous language of § ATCP 110.05(2)(a) requires the listing of separate addresses for both the seller and the sales representative only where the address for the seller and the sales representative are different. However, where the sales representative is an agent of the seller and may be reached through the seller, the requirement to list a separate address for each would be redundant and unnecessary.

“Further, despite having full knowledge that they would have to vacate their mobile home when the construction was to take place, and despite the fact that the start and completion dates were omitted from the contract for the convenience of the Snyders to allow them flexibility in choosing when to vacate their home, they now wish to benefit from such an omission. This is outside the scope of the protections afforded by Chapter ATCP 110. We cannot allow the Snyders to profit from the omission of a requirement that was eliminated for their benefit.

“However, based Based on the lack of case law interpreting Wis. Stat. § 100.20(5) in conjunction with Wis. Admin. Code §§ ATCP 110.05 and 110.07, we cannot conclude that the Snyders should have known that their claims were without any reasonable basis in law. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s denial of the defendants’ motion for attorney’s fees.”

Order affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist I, Milwaukee County, Donegan, J., Curley, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: George W. Love, Waukesha

For Respondent: S.A. Schapiro, Milwaukee