Board of Contract Appeals General Services Administration Washington, D.C. 20405 ________________________ DENIED: February 26, 2003 ________________________ GSBCA 16026 JOHN GLASURE, Appellant, v. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, Respondent. John Glasure, pro se, Harlem Springs, OH. A.R. Dattolo, Office of Regional Counsel, General Services Administration, Atlanta, GA, counsel for Respondent. Before Board Judges BORWICK, WILLIAMS, and DeGRAFF. DeGRAFF, Board Judge. John Glasure purchased a truck at a General Services Administration (GSA) auction. Mr. Glasure subsequently learned that the truck had some defects of which he was unaware when he placed his bid. He asked GSA to reduce the sales price, to compensate for the defects. Mr. Glasure appeals GSA's decision not to reduce the sales price. Because the terms of the warranty that GSA provided to Mr. Glasure preclude the remedy that he seeks, we grant GSA's motion for summary relief and deny the appeal. Findings of Fact In mid-2002, Mr. Glasure purchased a truck at a GSA auction. Exhibit 6. [Foot # 1 ] The terms and conditions of the sale included the following: ****************** Footnote Begin ********** [Foot # 1 ] All citations are to exhibits contained in the appeal file. ****************** Footnote End ************ Description Warranty and Refunds Description Warranty. The Government warrants to the original purchaser that the property listed in the GSAAuctions.gov website will conform to its description. If a misdescription is determined before removal of the property, the Government will keep the property and refund any money paid. If a misdescription is determined after removal, the Government will refund any money paid if the purchaser takes the property at his or her expense to a location specified by the Contracting Officer following the Refund Claim Procedure described below. No refunds will be made, after property is removed, for shortages of individual items within a lot. This warranty is in place of all other guarantees and warranties, expressed or implied. The Government does not warrant the merchantability of the property or its purpose. The purchaser is not entitled to any payment for loss of profit or any other money damages special, direct, indirect, or consequential. Refund Claim Procedure. To file a refund claim for misdescribed property, (1) submit a written notice to the Contracting Officer within 15 calendar days from the date of removal that the property was misdescribed, (2) maintain the property in the purchased condition until it is returned, and (3) return the property at your own expense to a location specified by the Contracting Officer. Refund Amount. The refund is limited to the purchase price of the misdescribed property. Exhibits 2-4. Within fifteen days after removing the car from the auction lot, Mr. Glasure notified GSA that he thought that the truck had been misdescribed. Exhibit 8. GSA offered to take back the truck and refund Mr. Glasure's money, but Mr. Glasure did not agree to such an arrangement. Instead, he asked GSA to adjust the contract price. GSA's contracting officer denied Mr. Glasure's request on September 9, 2002. Exhibit 5. Mr. Glasure appealed to the Board from the contracting officer's decision. In his notice of appeal, Mr. Glasure wants GSA to adjust the contract price from $2451.33 to $500, which he believes is the value of the truck. Exhibit 11. GSA filed a motion for summary relief, to which Mr. Glasure responded. Discussion Summary relief is appropriate when there are no genuine issues of material fact in dispute and when the moving party is entitled to relief as a matter of law. A fact is material if it will affect our decision. An issue is genuine if enough evidence exists such that the fact could reasonably be decided in favor of the non-movant at a hearing. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986); Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986). Because there are no genuine issues of material fact in dispute and because GSA is entitled to relief as a matter of law, we grant GSA's motion for summary relief. Our findings of fact are taken from GSA's statement of facts in support of its motion for summary relief, and from Mr. Glasure's opposition to GSA's motion for summary relief, insofar as they are supported by the exhibits and not contested by the other party. The parties do not disagree about any of the material facts. GSA is entitled to relief as a matter of law because the terms of the sale limit GSA's liability to Mr. Glasure. Even if the truck was misdescribed, the terms of the sale provide that Mr. Glasure's recovery is limited to a refund of his purchase price. The terms of the sale allow Mr. Glasure to return the truck in the same condition as when he removed it from the auction lot and to obtain a refund of the amount he paid. The terms of the sale do not give Mr. Glasure the option of obtaining a reduced purchase price to compensate for the defects that he found when he removed the truck from the auction lot. Bob's Auto Sales v. General Services Administration, GSBCA 14447, 98-1 BCA 29,647 (buyer's only remedy is to return car for refund when description misstated year of manufacture); John Gottsche, GSBCA 8374, 87-3 BCA 20,076 (buyer's only remedy is to return car for refund when not equipped with power steering or power disc brakes as stated in description); Jerome T. Jenks, GSBCA 7952, 86-2 BCA 18,877 (buyer's remedy is to return vehicle for refund, not to receive reduction in purchase price). Decision GSA's motion for summary relief is granted and the appeal is DENIED. __________________________________ MARTHA H. DeGRAFF Board Judge We concur: ________________________________ __________________________________ ANTHONY S. BORWICK MARY ELLEN COSTER WILLIAMS Board Judge Board Judge