Can’t resell your F150 EV? [CLOSED DUE TO POLITICS]

[Drydogg1]

I’m a GM Master Technician, to me, not being able to sell my vehicle that I put down a lot of “my” own money, taxes, licensed, insured and making obscene payments, and now have a newly formed “automotive HOA” tell me when or how I sell my vehicle? People!!! Next you won’t be able to sell your homes for 10 years, or make a profit on your property!!! This is straight up communism!!! Wake up!!! I love a lot of FORD products and have driven and owned many... if Ford is going to do this, DON’T purchase anything they produce! Stop accepting and giving your freedom away!!! We are losing freedoms everyday, soon you won’t have any left!!!

Sponsored

 

[Viper GTS]

However many political science courses you were required to take to become a GM Master Technician, it clearly was not enough.

 

[adoublee]

Thanks for signing up and at least suggesting you work for GM.

 

[F150ROD]

“I work for GM but have Tesla Stock”………. Lmao

 

[Lime Green]

Ford can not legally restrict you, no matter how they word their agreements, from selling your own property. Titles of ownership were created for this very purpose. The only way they could restrict you is to retain possession of your title and they would need just cause to do so in the form of a lien or retained percentage of ownership as in they would still be named on the title or would be bonded with the title in some way.

The no-resale clause is being blown way out of proportion and what it's really about is that you agree to not resale the vehicle before fully taking ownership. Meaning that if you take delivery and immediately flip it for a profit as a new vehicle they will have an issue with you. In many states this is even illegal if you do not have a proper dealership or brokers license. A dealership can refuse to sell you the vehicle if they believe you're just going to flip it for a profit.

Once you register, license and title the vehicle, it's yours and if you sell it, it's a used vehicle, even if it's sold 10 seconds after the title is issued and you never drove it.

Ford tried to make a deal out resale of the GT a few years back. They were using no-resale clauses in the first batches of sales, but never went after anyone except for one person... John Cena. There were extra stipulations in Cena's contract with Ford because he wasn't one of the eager reservation holders. Ford was using his popularity and essentially granting him the ability to buy the GT early on trying to forge marketing ties and sponsorships and all that. Cena was disenchanted with the whole ordeal and ended up not liking the car as he found it uncomfortable to physically sit in and drive it. He sold it only a month after taking possession for a roughly $1M profit and Ford was pissed off to say the least. They went after Cena in court, not specifically for selling the car, but for tarnishing their brand image and not following through with other contractual obligations. The resale of the car is what attracted all the media attention... Ford felt it sent the wrong message, reselling the car so soon after he got it. They settled privately so we don't know how it all worked out. Supposedly Cena donated the proceeds from the sale to a charity of Ford's choosing among whatever else they agreed on. Yet, I think he was donating the proceeds to charity all along...

 

[Snickerdoodle]

Ford can not legally restrict you, no matter how they word their agreements, from selling your own property. Titles of ownership were created for this very purpose. The only way they could restrict you is to retain possession of your title and they would need just cause to do so in the form of a lien or retained percentage of ownership as in they would still be named on the title or would be bonded with the title in some way.

The no-resale clause is being blown way out of proportion and what it's really about is that you agree to not resale the vehicle before fully taking ownership. Meaning that if you take delivery and immediately flip it for a profit as a new vehicle they will have an issue with you. In many states this is even illegal if you do not have a proper dealership or brokers license. A dealership can refuse to sell you the vehicle if they believe you're just going to flip it for a profit.

Once you register, license and title the vehicle, it's yours and if you sell it, it's a used vehicle, even if it's sold 10 seconds after the title is issued and you never drove it.

Ford tried to make a deal out resale of the GT a few years back. They were using no-resale clauses in the first batches of sales, but never went after anyone except for one person... John Cena. There were extra stipulations in Cena's contract with Ford because he wasn't one of the eager reservation holders. Ford was using his popularity and essentially granting him the ability to buy the GT early on trying to forge marketing ties and sponsorships and all that. Cena was disenchanted with the whole ordeal and ended up not liking the car as he found it uncomfortable to physically sit in and drive it. He sold it only a month after taking possession for a roughly $1M profit and Ford was pissed off to say the least. They went after Cena in court, not specifically for selling the car, but for tarnishing their brand image and not following through with other contractual obligations. The resale of the car is what attracted all the media attention... Ford felt it sent the wrong message, reselling the car so soon after he got it. They settled privately so we don't know how it all worked out. Supposedly Cena donated the proceeds from the sale to a charity of Ford's choosing among whatever else they agreed on. Yet, I think he was donating the proceeds to charity all along...

This. Also, it is Fords way to try to avoid dealers charging obscene Addendums to the vehicles. This is the first step. Dealers argue that if customers can turnaround and sell the lightning for 20K over MSRP, why cant we as dealers? Weird times we are in.... weird times

 

[Drydogg1]

However many political science courses you were required to take to become a GM Master Technician, it clearly was not enough.

 

[rydfree]

So if you buy the Lightning and then have financial troubles after a few months due to loss of job or medical issues , you're stuck with your Lightning ?
A dealership can prevent you selling YOUR Lightning to recoup your down payment and any monthly payments that have been made so that you can pay for your spouses cancer treatments ?

That sounds like a dick move and a PR nightmare waiting to happen.

 

[Drydogg1]

You are right about the political sciences, but I have and still do work on all the major brands since the early 70’s. There is no disrespect to the Ford guys. I’m coming from the early days where 50% of labor charged to the customer went to the mechanic/technician. The new techs hired in the mid 80’s started working for half or less than 50% charged to to the customer. Dealerships and soon after the aftermarket shops across the board, the 50% went away. I work for a dealership that charges $140 hr. To the customer and most of the techs are at or near $25 hr. Techs pay north of $25k for tech school and the investment of 10’s of thousands in tools. No cost of living raises, lousy benefits. I’m just saying we are losing a lot of things because people are not standing up and saying “enough”. I’m not attacking anyone. I’ve had over 50 years of working history watching this country evolve. And yes I’ve also have been a Ford, AMC, Chrysler, GM and Toyota Tech. I’m not bragging at all. I just don’t want future people losing their rights.

 

[Viper GTS]

You are right about the political sciences, but I have and still do work on all the major brands since the early 70’s. There is no disrespect to the Ford guys. I’m coming from the early days where 50% of labor charged to the customer went to the mechanic/technician. The new techs hired in the mid 80’s started working for half or less than 50% charged to to the customer. Dealerships and soon after the aftermarket shops across the board, the 50% went away. I work for a dealership that charges $140 hr. To the customer and most of the techs are at or near $25 hr. Techs pay north of $25k for tech school and the investment of 10’s of thousands in tools. No cost of living raises, lousy benefits. I’m just saying we are losing a lot of things because people are not standing up and saying “enough”. I’m not attacking anyone. I’ve had over 50 years of working history watching this country evolve. And yes I’ve also have been a Ford, AMC, Chrysler, GM and Toyota Tech. I’m not bragging at all. I just don’t want future people losing their rights.

We are in complete agreement on the state of pay, job security, etc for the working masses. Society has seen a rapid shift in the last couple decades of what skillsets are valued, but blue collar or otherwise - We are all getting railed. Some of just a little less so because we happen to have the right skills at the right time.

None of this, however, makes Ford's attempt to get legitimate end-user customers trucks at MSRP anything close to communism.

 

[Drydogg1]

So if you buy the Lightning and then have financial troubles after a few months due to loss of job or medical issues , you're stuck with your Lightning ?
A dealership can prevent you selling YOUR Lightning to recoup your down payment and any monthly payments that have been made so that you can pay for your spouses cancer treatments ?

That sounds like a dick move and a PR nightmare waiting to happen.

So if you buy the Lightning and then have financial troubles after a few months due to loss of job or medical issues , you're stuck with your Lightning ?
A dealership can prevent you selling YOUR Lightning to recoup your down payment and any monthly payments that have been made so that you can pay for your spouses cancer treatments ?

That sounds like a dick move and a PR nightmare waiting to happen.

That’s my point, don’t give them the power to take you down. I’ve purchased many new vehicles and sometimes life just happens and a way out like selling maybe the only option, but doable.

 

[Viper GTS]

That’s my point, don’t give them the power to take you down. I’ve purchased many new vehicles and sometimes life just happens and a way out like selling maybe the only option, but doable.

Dealer right of first refusal for buyback at the price paid makes this a nearly perfect solution.

 

[PA Lightning]

If Ford was serious about the restriction, IMO they would mandate a restriction, not suggest a restriction be placed in the purchase contract I would find it hard to believe that any senior attorney wrote the suggested language because it would not be enforceable given some of the contingencies identified in this thread by other members which would require someone to sell assets.

I think they are trying to address and quash issues related to the Bronco release.
I like that they made the dealer "accept" your order. That identifies the price and makes the dealer identify the ADM at time of order. I assume some dealers will try to tack on ADM at time of delivery, but the fact that they accepted the order reduces that opportunity IMO.

There will always be naysayers but I do not anticipate an issue with the no sale suggestion. It won't happen.


Edit: I see in the original thread ,identifying the memo, the memo was removed at Ford's request. Interesting, Guess they did not want to get the villagers fired up at this early point.

 

[Drydogg1]

We are in complete agreement on the state of pay, job security, etc for the working masses. Society has seen a rapid shift in the last couple decades of what skillsets are valued, but blue collar or otherwise - We are all getting railed. Some of just a little less so because we happen to have the right skills at the right time.

None of this, however, makes Ford's attempt to get legitimate end-user customers trucks at MSRP anything close to communism.

You are right, I don’t believe it’s communism either, but what door will open next?

Sponsored