Ford to prevent F-150 Lightning customers from reselling trucks?

[wired]

Ford is cracking down on anyone with mercenary intentions when it comes to buying an F-150 Lightning next year. In an effort to stop customers from quickly flipping their electric pickup truck for a hefty profit, Ford delivered a notice to dealerships issuing a new clause for soon-to-be owners. The note was posted on the F-150 Gen 14 forum on Friday. Should a dealer opt in, customers will be required to sign a "No-Sale" provision, banning them from reselling the truck within one year of ownership. The key here is, it's not required, Ford told Roadshow.

"Such a requirement is between a dealer and their customer," a spokesperson said. "It is up to the dealer to decide to use it and to consult with local laws in the state they operate should they choose to do so."

The clause reads, "Purchaser hereby agrees that it will not sell, offer to sell or otherwise transfer ownership interest in the Vehicle prior to the first anniversary of the date hereof. Purchaser further agrees that Seller may seek injunctive relief to prevent the transfer of title of the Vehicle or demand payment from Purchaser of all value received as consideration for the sale or transfer."

Continue Reading @ cnet

 

[Shadyant]

Interesting

I’ve seen this possible clause when vehicles are purchased on Ford discount plans like
A, X etc…

No selling your Lightning for 200K at Meccum or Barrett Jackson. Lol.

I’m not a fan of these control clauses. Hopefully not a ton of dealers impose the clause.

 

[Ssob]

No lawyer, but seems a little broad, nearly unenforceable. You can't buy it and transfer ownership to a family member? You can't transfer it into a trust, for estate planning? Can't transfer it to a business? Doesn't even sound like a lawyer wrote the language. Why does a Purchaser have to agree that the Seller may seek injunctive relief to prevent the transfer, blah, blah, blah? Either the Seller can or can't seek injunctive relief, according to the laws and the courts. Sounds like bluster, rather than substance.

 

[Shadyant]

No lawyer, but seems a little broad, nearly unenforceable. You can't buy it and transfer ownership to a family member? You can't transfer it into a trust, for estate planning? Can't transfer it to a business? Doesn't even sound like a lawyer wrote the language. Why does a Purchaser have to agree that the Seller may seek injunctive relief to prevent the transfer, blah, blah, blah? Either the Seller can or can't seek injunctive relief, according to the laws and the courts. Sounds like bluster, rather than substance.

Agreed. Not a very commonly used doc.

It’s simply an attempt to avoid seller price gauging.
Especially if Ford does end up allowing X plan pricing. Which means I get to buy at $100 over invoice with NO dealer fees.

In case some people put in reservations ONLY with the intent of trying to sell for profit and never Intending to keep the vehicle.

Not saying I agree with the tactic but I could have done 2-3 reservations to keep one and immediately sell the other Lightnings when I got them for huge unfair prices. Like the dealers adding ADM just to make huge unfair profits.