He is still within the confines of the contract and still bound by it...IOW, he has to buy if the owner is in agreement to the reduction.
No, he doesn't. Once he's declined the original contract, there is none. Only if the two of them agree to new terms and they didn't. There was email discussion, but never an agreement. It's a very bad part of boat contracts (houses are the same). Do I think morally, ethically, what he did was wrong? Yes. I think it was bad faith. However, he rejected the boat based on survey. Seller agreed to compensate for the issues, buyer declined a new deal. In this case, I know what happened. He'd offered more than he originally planned to spend and had now gotten cold feet. He didn't even realize it, but he was looking for a reason to say no.
In reality, today's contracts give the buyer virtually unlimited ability to back out of a contract up until closing. Buyer's reasons for rejecting don't have to be valid. Simply, after trial and survey, I reject the deal. I didn't like it. There's never been a used boat with a perfect survey.
Here's typical wording:
Acceptances of the above contingencies are at the sole discretion of the BUYER. To accept or indicate satisfaction of these contingencies BUYER need take no further action. For BUYER to reject VESSEL or not consummate the purchase by reason of contingencies, BUYER has until at 5 PM EST to notify SELLING BROKER in writing of rejection. If no notice is received by SELLING BROKER by the specified date it shall be deemed that that contingency has been satisfied or waived.
A small percentage of contracts lead to actual sales. I've heard numbers from 15% to 50% from various brokers. My best guess is it's between 20% and 35%.
I look at boat contracts and houses and building contracts the way they're written today as nothing more than options. It's you've agreed to let me check it out based on my deposit and to sell it to me at this price if I still want it two weeks or whatever time period from now. There's one home investor in South Florida abusing the system weekly and putting the selling brokers in very difficult situations. He makes offers, has seven days to inspect. He returns with a ridiculous reduction proposal. The selling broker is legally obligated to present the offer to the seller. What can she legally say about the one making the offer? He/She has to be very careful. He's threatened suit and going after their license.