DC Code § 28:2-605 (2021)
2021 District of Columbia Code|Title 28 - Commercial Instruments and Transactions. [Enacted title]|Subtitle I - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 2 - Sales|Part VI - Breach, Repudiation and Excuse|§ 28:2-605. Waiver of buyer’s objections by failure to particularize

(1) The buyer’s failure to state in connection with rejection a particular defect which is ascertainable by reasonable inspection precludes him from relying on the unstated defect to justify rejection or to establish breach (a) where the seller could have cured it if stated seasonably; or (b) between merchants when the seller has after rejection made a request in writing for a full and final written statement of all defects on which the buyer proposes to rely. (2) Payments against documents made without reservation of rights precludes recovery of the payment for defects apparent in the documents.  (Dec. 30, 1963, 77 Stat. 660, Pub. L. 88-243, § 1; Apr. 27, 2013, D.C. Law 19-299, § 3(l), 60 DCR 2634.)  Prior Codifications 1981 Ed., § 28:2-605. 1973 Ed., § 28:2-605. Effect of Amendments The 2013 amendment by D.C. Law 19-299 substituted “apparent in” for “apparent on the face of” in (2). Uniform Commercial Code Comment Prior Uniform Statutory Provision: None. Purposes: 1. The present section rests upon a policy of permitting the buyer to give a quick and informal notice of defects in a tender without penalizing him for omissions in his statement, while at the same time protecting a seller who is reasonably misled by the buyer’s failure to state curable defects. 2. Where the defect in a tender is one which could have been cured by the seller, a buyer who merely rejects the delivery without stating his objections to it is probably acting in commercial bad faith and seeking to get out of a deal which has become unprofitable. Subsection (1)(a), following the general policy of this Article which looks to preserving the deal wherever possible, therefore insists that the seller’s right to correct his tender in such circumstances be protected. 3. When the time for cure is past, subsection (1)(b) makes it plain that a seller is entitled upon request to a final statement of objections upon which he can rely. What is needed is that he make clear to the buyer exactly what is being sought. A formal demand under paragraph (b) will be sufficient in the case of a merchant-buyer. 4. Subsection (2) applies to the particular case of documents the same principle which the section on effects of acceptance applies to the case of goods. The matter is dealt with in this section in terms of “waiver” of objections rather than of right to revoke acceptance, partly to avoid any confusion with the problems of acceptance of goods and partly because defects in documents which are not taken as grounds for rejection are generally minor ones. The only defects concerned in the present subsection are defects in the documents which are apparent on their face. Where payment is required against the documents they must be inspected before payment, and the payment then constitutes acceptance of the documents. Under the section dealing with this problem, such acceptance of the documents does not constitute an acceptance of the goods or impair any options or remedies of the buyer for their improper delivery. Where the documents are delivered without requiring such contemporary action as payment from the buyer, the reason of the next section on what constitutes acceptance of goods, applies. Their acceptance by non-objection is therefore postponed until after a reasonable time for their inspection. In either situation, however, the buyer “waives” only what is apparent on the face of the documents. Cross References: Point 2: Section 2-508. Point 4: Sections 2-512(2), 2-606(1)(b), 2-607(2). Definitional Cross References: “Between merchants”. Section 2-104. “Buyer”. Section 2-103. “Seasonably”. Section 1-204. “Seller”. Section 2-103. “Writing” and “written”. Section 1-201.