At age 17, in a state in which the age of majority is 18, a few days before she turned 18, Samantha purchased a used car from Used But Cool used cars. She had a deal whereby she paid $75 per month on the car. She drove the car and made payments for fourteen months after she turned 18. Then, she returned the car to Used But Cool and told them that she wanted all her money back. Used But Cool claimed the car was a necessity. Samantha and her parents claimed that the parents were ready and willing to provide a car to Samantha and that she only purchased the car from Used But Cool because she liked that particular style and color. When the purchase of the car was made, Used But Cool knew that Samantha was under the age of 18.

In the dispute between Samantha and the owner of Used But Cool, which of the following is true regarding any claim that Samantha affirmed the contract?

Multiple Choice

So long as, after reaching the age of majority, Samantha did not state orally or in writing that she intended to be bound by the contract, then she did not commit the type of express ratification required for her to be bound.

Samantha may have impliedly ratified the contract by making payments for so long after she turned 18.

An implied ratification occurs when parents agree to accept the debt entered into by a minor.

If Samantha caused any damage whatsoever to the car, she was said to have impliedly ratified the contract.

Samantha was required to expressly ratify the contract before she could be bound to it so long as no damage was done; however, if she did any damage to the car, as a matter of law, she is said to have expressly ratified it.