Under the UCC battle of the forms, if an acceptance contains a term changing the delivery time, and one party is a nonmerchant, what is the effect?

• A. There is a counteroffer that ends the contract.
• B. A contract is formed, and the revised term is a proposed addition; the contract is valid.
• C. There is no contract because the acceptance altered essential terms.
• D. The contract is void and unenforceable.

Answer: (B)

Under the UCC battle of the forms, an acceptance that adds or changes terms can still form a contract, even if the terms differ from the offer. When one party is not a merchant, the added term in the acceptance is treated as a proposal for addition to the contract rather than as a binding part of the agreement. So the contract can be formed based on the original terms, and the newly proposed delivery-time change is not binding unless the other party expressly agrees to it. That’s why the correct result is that a contract is formed and the revised term is a proposed addition; the contract is valid. The other options presume the acceptance ends the deal, or that no contract exists, which isn’t correct here because formation can occur despite differing terms, with the nonmerchant term simply not automatically binding.