https://www.autonews.com/retail/ford-goes-court-rescind-original-gt-sale-canada
Ford Motor Co. is suing participants in an alleged civil conspiracy to improperly acquire a custom-built 2018 Ford GT supercar in Canada, resell it for a profit and swiftly resell it again for yet another profit, all within a matter of weeks.
Ummmmm....you mean I can't sell my car, the car I just bought for $500k.....lol !
C8 @ $59k with no strings attached
Quote from: FL SAAC TONY on February 25, 2020, 02:47:05 PM
Ford Motor Co. is suing participants in an alleged civil conspiracy to improperly acquire a custom-built 2018 Ford GT supercar in Canada, resell it for a profit and swiftly resell it again for yet another profit, all within a matter of weeks.
Ummmmm....you mean I can't sell my car, the car I just bought for $500k.....lol !
C8 @ $59k with no strings attached
Because the C8 will not be appreciating after purchase.
Looks like another John Cena breach o purchase contract case. Maybe some legal minds here can chime in on their view of the Ford contract issue.
Not looking for appreciation, looking for fun and enjoyment!
Buy, use and dispose properly
Quote from: 2112 on February 25, 2020, 05:21:32 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC TONY on February 25, 2020, 02:47:05 PM
Ford Motor Co. is suing participants in an alleged civil conspiracy to improperly acquire a custom-built 2018 Ford GT supercar in Canada, resell it for a profit and swiftly resell it again for yet another profit, all within a matter of weeks.
Ummmmm....you mean I can't sell my car, the car I just bought for $500k.....lol !
C8 @ $59k with no strings attached
Because the C8 will not be appreciating after purchase.
Quote from: 2112 on February 25, 2020, 05:21:32 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC TONY on February 25, 2020, 02:47:05 PM
Ford Motor Co. is suing participants in an alleged civil conspiracy to improperly acquire a custom-built 2018 Ford GT supercar in Canada, resell it for a profit and swiftly resell it again for yet another profit, all within a matter of weeks.
Ummmmm....you mean I can't sell my car, the car I just bought for $500k.....lol !
C8 @ $59k with no strings attached
SO TRUE!!!!
Because the C8 will not be appreciating after purchase.
Y'all dont read the threads...reply numero 44
"Not looking for appreciation, looking for fun and enjoyment!
Buy, use and dispose properly "
Quote from: Chad on February 25, 2020, 06:06:34 PM
Quote from: 2112 on February 25, 2020, 05:21:32 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC TONY on February 25, 2020, 02:47:05 PM
Ford Motor Co. is suing participants in an alleged civil conspiracy to improperly acquire a custom-built 2018 Ford GT supercar in Canada, resell it for a profit and swiftly resell it again for yet another profit, all within a matter of weeks.
Ummmmm....you mean I can't sell my car, the car I just bought for $500k.....lol !
C8 @ $59k with no strings attached
SO TRUE!!!!
Because the C8 will not be appreciating after purchase.
Quote from: FL SAAC TONY on February 25, 2020, 02:47:05 PM
Ford Motor Co. is suing participants in an alleged civil conspiracy to improperly acquire a custom-built 2018 Ford GT supercar in Canada, resell it for a profit and swiftly resell it again for yet another profit, all within a matter of weeks.
Ummmmm....you mean I can't sell my car, the car I just bought for $500k.....lol !
C8 @ $59k with no strings attached
Give it a rest will ya.
QSS
Your request has been respectfully acknowledged.
I am bowing out, Arigatōgozaimashita
Quote from: QuickSilverShelby on February 25, 2020, 08:09:01 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC TONY on February 25, 2020, 02:47:05 PM
Ford Motor Co. is suing participants in an alleged civil conspiracy to improperly acquire a custom-built 2018 Ford GT supercar in Canada, resell it for a profit and swiftly resell it again for yet another profit, all within a matter of weeks.
Ummmmm....you mean I can't sell my car, the car I just bought for $500k.....lol !
C8 @ $59k with no strings attached
Give it a rest will ya.
QSS
Domo arigato.
Meanwhile we await the verdict and outcome of the lawsuit.
I believe the contract should be enforced. To do otherwise is to interfere with the freedom to contract between parties. The court may look to the severity of the contractual restrictions when deciding. Two years is nothing in my mind.
If there was found to be overreaching by Ford, the terms might not be enforced. That is unlikely though because both sides were sophisticated participants. These days the one that breaches gets rewarded in court usually. That having been said if it were me I would not disrespect the Ford family by selling the car less than the time limit placed in the contract. I would likely create an automotive shrine around the car with special days allotted to burnt hydrocarbon offerings to the GT and to appease the automotive Gods and Goddesses.
Is Ford seeking damages? That would be kind of a stretch to show they were hurt by this sale isn't it?
As a result, how can this go to anything but a slap on the wrist to the defendant?
I'd seek damages from Ford for the legal costs to defend myself and claim this is frivolent and should have been thrown out?
Quote from: shelbydoug on February 26, 2020, 08:19:31 AM
Is Ford seeking damages? That would be kind of a stretch to show they were hurt by this sale isn't it?
As a result, how can this go to anything but a slap on the wrist to the defendant?
I'd seek damages from Ford for the legal costs to defend myself and claim this is frivolent and should have been thrown out?
To avoid your arguments which I believe to be meritorious defenses to the contract, I would structure the contract to provide a specified monetary damage for breach and that would facilitate my proofs come the time of trial (or default if they fail to defend).
Quote from: deathsled on February 26, 2020, 08:58:41 AM
Quote from: shelbydoug on February 26, 2020, 08:19:31 AM
Is Ford seeking damages? That would be kind of a stretch to show they were hurt by this sale isn't it?
As a result, how can this go to anything but a slap on the wrist to the defendant?
I'd seek damages from Ford for the legal costs to defend myself and claim this is frivolent and should have been thrown out?
To avoid your arguments which I believe to be meritorious defenses to the contract, I would structure the contract to provide a specified monetary damage for breach and that would facilitate my proofs come the time of trial (or default if they fail to defend).
Do you know as a fact that is what Ford did in the Contract?
Even so, I'd argue that was needless coercion since Ford can't possibly be injured by the reselling the car AT ANY POINT since it appreciates the overall value of all of the cars which aids to their (Ford's) reputation, not hurt it, etc.
I'd argue that was my understanding of the reasoning for Ford's clause in the contract and that is how I understood it and why I agreed to it in the first place.
How can a Protagonist (my term) argue to the contrary? Even if the Judge is forced to decide in Ford's favor, the damages would need to be determined separately?
What actual damages are there? Only gains.
IF it would be determined that Ford gains from the resale, it would add argument that the entire suit was Frivolous to begin with.
Rules of Procedure prohibit filing Frivolous law suits. The attorneys on record for the filings would have to be examined for intentionally filing frivolously knowingly and could have to face disbarment proceedings?
That's how I'd defend this. Make the attack dogs put their tails between their legs. They are in real jeopardy for defending a corporate bully, Ford.
These aren't "country hicks" that Ford has representing them and no attorney wants to face a disbarment proceeding?
In addition, the Judge has to deal with my position on lawfulness of the original filing and question the Ford attorneys about how they documented at filing. If they are not truthful, they could be in jeopardy of purgery. Another knock towards a disbarment procedure.
They are not going to be let off of the hook by saying "I don't know". If they really piss the Judge off, they will get fined or worse.
This is when the opposite council really gets nasty. They start showing attitude to everyone including the Judge, showing open shit fits in court. It's a quick turn of events.
Just a thought. Glad I'm not involved in it.
Hey Ford - Its called KARMA and its a bitch. You idiots screwed up the NFGT allotment system so bad and forgot those of us FGT owners that still are the original owners of 05/06 FGT's (that you all promised you would not forget). As they say in politics, the fix was in from the start.
Shelbydoug, all of your arguments are sound. I haven't read the contract but suggested what I would have built in for Ford. You could counter argue that this was a contract of adhesion and therefore the language is void. And yes filing frivolous pleadings can get you sanctioned but not necessarily disbarred. The penalties would be fined imposed by the court. Another defense could be necessity. What if you declared bankruptcy before the two year period and the US Trustee seized the poor GT to resell it and satisfy some of the debt. Then what? There are a lot of loopholes that would need to be fixed. This is not an easy case for Ford.
+1 Stephen
Quote from: stephen_becker on February 26, 2020, 12:14:43 PM
Hey Ford - Its called KARMA and its a bitch. You idiots screwed up the NFGT allotment system so bad and forgot those of us FGT owners that still are the original owners of 05/06 FGT's (that you all promised you would not forget). As they say in politics, the fix was in from the start.
Quote from: deathsled on February 26, 2020, 12:19:23 PM
Shelbydoug, all of your arguments are sound. I haven't read the contract but suggested what I would have built in for Ford. You could counter argue that this was a contract of adhesion and therefore the language is void. And yes filing frivolous pleadings can get you sanctioned but not necessarily disbarred. The penalties would be fined imposed by the court. Another defense could be necessity. What if you declared bankruptcy before the two year period and the US Trustee seized the poor GT to resell it and satisfy some of the debt. Then what? There are a lot of loopholes that would need to be fixed. This is not an easy case for Ford.
A documented history of sanctions for filing frivolous (plural) law suits would need to be looked at as a pattern of harasment and future more stringent actions considered?
How many sanctions are you allowed? You don't want to establish a history of them.
Quote from: stephen_becker on February 26, 2020, 12:14:43 PM
Hey Ford - Its called KARMA and its a bitch. You idiots screwed up the NFGT allotment system so bad and forgot those of us FGT owners that still are the original owners of 05/06 FGT's (that you all promised you would not forget). As they say in politics, the fix was in from the start.
I have to agree with you on this one.
Not that anyone particularly cares what I think (including me) but I don't like this pattern of elitism that Ford has been establishing really over the last thirty years or so.
Does anyone have a copy to share of the Ford contract that shows the wording about the two provision?
Quote from: shelbydoug on February 26, 2020, 01:00:14 PM
Quote from: deathsled on February 26, 2020, 12:19:23 PM
Shelbydoug, all of your arguments are sound. I haven't read the contract but suggested what I would have built in for Ford. You could counter argue that this was a contract of adhesion and therefore the language is void. And yes filing frivolous pleadings can get you sanctioned but not necessarily disbarred. The penalties would be fined imposed by the court. Another defense could be necessity. What if you declared bankruptcy before the two year period and the US Trustee seized the poor GT to resell it and satisfy some of the debt. Then what? There are a lot of loopholes that would need to be fixed. This is not an easy case for Ford.
A documented history of sanctions for filing frivolous (plural) law suits would need to be looked at as a pattern of harasment and future more stringent actions considered?
How many sanctions are you allowed? You don't want to establish a history of them.
You are correct. A pattern of such filings invites the scrutiny of the state Bar in addition to punishing fines. Something a lawyer definitely does not want.
Quote from: Don Johnston on February 26, 2020, 01:29:33 PM
Does anyone have a copy to share of the Ford contract that shows the wording about the two provision?
Ford has told the owners that if they decimate/distribute/copy/show/share etc a copy of anything to do with ordering and purchasing a NFGT that they maybe held accountable in a court of law - That was a big thing when they first came out over on that fordgtforum - Anybopdy that posted anything about price, terms, etc. was immediately removed from the forum.
I'm told contract basically states that Ford will have first right of refusal if you decide to sell in first 2 years. I believe that repurchase by Ford is full price paid less damage - so you can't total it and get your $ back.
I know of one car that was purchased by someone on the list who didn't have the money. He sold it before he took delivery. End buyer paid him a LARGE fee and had him order it the way he wanted it. Agreement was that is stays in original name for 2 years but end buyer has car.
Quote from: shelbydoug on February 26, 2020, 01:04:03 PM
Quote from: stephen_becker on February 26, 2020, 12:14:43 PM
Hey Ford - Its called KARMA and its a bitch. You idiots screwed up the NFGT allotment system so bad and forgot those of us FGT owners that still are the original owners of 05/06 FGT's (that you all promised you would not forget). As they say in politics, the fix was in from the start.
I have to agree with you on this one.
Not that anyone particularly cares what I think (including me) but I don't like this pattern of elitism that Ford has been establishing really over the last thirty years or so.
+1s all around!
Quote from: stephen_becker on February 26, 2020, 03:54:29 PM
Quote from: Don Johnston on February 26, 2020, 01:29:33 PM
Does anyone have a copy to share of the Ford contract that shows the wording about the two provision?
Ford has told the owners that if they decimate/distribute/copy/show/share etc a copy of anything to do with ordering and purchasing a NFGT that they maybe held accountable in a court of law - That was a big thing when they first came out over on that fordgtforum - Anybopdy that posted anything about price, terms, etc. was immediately removed from the forum.
That's a bunch of crap right there
Quote from: SCJSTU on March 04, 2020, 03:44:06 PM
Quote from: stephen_becker on February 26, 2020, 03:54:29 PM
Quote from: Don Johnston on February 26, 2020, 01:29:33 PM
Does anyone have a copy to share of the Ford contract that shows the wording about the two provision?
Ford has told the owners that if they decimate/distribute/copy/show/share etc a copy of anything to do with ordering and purchasing a NFGT that they maybe held accountable in a court of law - That was a big thing when they first came out over on that fordgtforum - Anybopdy that posted anything about price, terms, etc. was immediately removed from the forum.
That's a bunch of crap right there
Maybe so but few can afford to battle their team of lawyers which are on permanent retainer.
Remeber the movie, "The Mouse That Roared"? You'd be like Peter Sellers in the rowboat with the two other guys attacking New York with bow guns. Forgedaboudit!
I believe that the contract they used is called the FUNNEL contract
" The Mouse That Roared "! Now that was a great satire! You have to be an old member to remember he movie!
Fits the topic! New members....younger than 60....will not understand!
Quote from: 6s2055 on March 13, 2020, 03:34:40 PM
“ The Mouse That Roared “! Now that was a great satire! You have to be an old member to remember he movie!
Fits the topic! New members....younger than 60....will not understand!
Yes a Funny movie