Which action is NOT permissible by a seller when presented with multiple offers?

In the context of handling multiple offers, a seller is generally permitted to engage in various strategies regarding the offers they receive. Accepting only one offer is a standard and permissible action, as is presenting counteroffers on one or more of the offers.

Accepting all three offers is generally not feasible, as a seller can only sell a single property to one buyer at a time—the acceptance of multiple offers could lead to legal complications. However, the specific action of accepting one offer while designating the others as second and third is where the key issue lies.

By designating other offers as second and third, the seller would be implying an ongoing consideration of those offers even after accepting the primary one, which can lead to misunderstandings and potential disputes. Once an offer is accepted, it creates a binding agreement, and designating others as secondary could undermine the integrity of that contract.

Thus, the action of designating additional offers while accepting one is not permissible, as it does not align with the principles of clear contract acceptance and raises the potential for confusion or conflict among the parties involved.