A lessee is precluded from relying on a nonconforming performance as follows:
(1) The lessee's failure to state, in connection with a rejection under section 42a-2A-725, a particular nonconformity that is ascertainable by reasonable inspection precludes reliance on the unstated nonconformity to justify rejection or to establish default if:
(A) The lessor, upon a seasonable particularization, had a right to cure under section 42a-2A-729 and would have cured the nonconformity; or
(B) Between merchants, the lessor or the supplier after rejection has made a request in a record for a full and final statement in a record of all nonconformities on which the lessee proposes to rely.
(2) The lessee's failure to state, in connection with a revocation of acceptance under section 42a-2A-733, the nonconformity that justifies the revocation precludes the lessee from relying on the nonconformity to justify the revocation or to establish default if the lessor had a right to cure the default under section 42a-2A-729 and could have cured the breach.
(P.A. 02-131, S. 84.)