Ford Dealer Requiring Resale Right-of-First-Refusal From New Bronco Raptor Buyer

[AZ_Liberty]

I bought mine from Woodhouse in Blair in June 22, I didn't have to sign an agreement, and I got MSRP.

Your .sig say OB not Raptor.

Raptor like the GT350 is a specialty vehicle.

Sponsored

 

[LarryZiegler]

I sell you my house. Would you sign a contract similar to this basically saying “if you ever decide to sell the house, you must allow me to buy it back from you at what you paid me for it”? Obviously not.

I question the enforceability of this. So, were I this customer, I’d probably sign it and then do whatever the hell I wanted with the Bronco anyway.

Knowing that I had signed this paper - I would just be aware of that if/when I decided to sell my Bronco. e.g. advertise in nearby cities rather than my local town. To try to save the hassle of a legal challenge. But if push came to shove….I’d fight it out in the courts. Making sure to keep the local media informed every step of the way.

Nothing like a big corporation suing the little guy for a good human interest story - and some negative attention for the dealership that would effect future sales.

A similar issue existed here in Calf when the real estate market was red hot. Housing tracts required purchasers to be the owner occupants for a year. This was to avoid investors from scooping up the majority of homes for rentals which ultimately devalues the neighborhood. In California, this restriction is only enforceable for the first year. As far as automobiles go, Ford enforced the agreement on John Cena when he sold his Ford GT

 

[nebbigredmachine]

I bought mine from Woodhouse in Blair in June 22, I didn't have to sign an agreement, and I got MSRP.

I got mine from Woodhouse, but at the Omaha dealership. I had to sign one.

 

[Gladdox]

I'm not an attorney, but I deal with legal documents all day for work. There are numerous red flags on this document, not the least of which is that it doesn't read like a legal document at all. It was likely written up by some toad at the dealership who thinks he's clever.

If anyone comes across something like this at your dealer, I'd strongly encourage you to check with your state AG's office before signing, as it is (a) probably not legally binding/enforceable given its poor construction, and (b) may even be illegal to the extent that it gets the dealer in trouble.

Heck, even mentioning "I will need my attorney to review this before I sign," may be enough to get them to suddenly remember that the document doesn't apply to your purchase. (The whole "Surprise! Sign this or pay $20k over MSRP!" is borderline, if not textbook, extortion.)

That said, the document only references a for-profit sale or trade. Even if someone signed it, I imagine they could easily skirt the whole thing by simply gifting the vehicle to a friend or family member, or signing it over to a trust or LLC.

 

[GmaninAZ]

Has anyone seen this story yet? I just came across it.

https://www.carscoops.com/2023/03/ford-dealer-demands-resale-rights-from-new-bronco-raptor-buyer/

Ford has been doing this for the GT

 

[brrke]

Ford has been doing this for the GT

Ford GT document is an actual legal document, this is not.

 

[GmaninAZ]

Ford GT document is an actual legal document, this is not.

I know that. I did not say the documents are the same, but rather Ford was requiring screened buyers to sign a document saying they will keep their "special" vehicle for 2 years so they do not flip the vehicle, protecting those who want to purchase and actually own the vehicle long term.
If a buyer were to sign the Sewell doc. I would think it would be binding to the signature, like a hand written bill of sale between private parties? Maybe Texas law differs from Canadian law?

 

[Boldbronco]

There're great arguments on both sides, I agree that there's flippers ruining for us enthusiasts, and yes, there should be a better way to weed them out. but I'm also don't agreed to sign a doc. telling me that I can't do what ever I want with my property. I fully intent to keep my Raptor, but if something happens to me and I can't keep it, I have the right to sell it to whom ever I want, and in this case, and any other case, to the highest bidder. which is exactly what this greedy dealer is trying to do, take it from you and sell it to the highest bidder.

 

[5PC24]

There're great arguments on both sides, I agree that there's flippers ruining for us enthusiasts, and yes, there should be a better way to weed them out. but I'm also don't agreed to sign a doc. telling me that I can't do what ever I want with my property. I fully intent to keep my Raptor, but if something happens to me and I can't keep it, I have the right to sell it to whom ever I want, and in this case, and any other case, to the highest bidder. which is exactly what this greedy dealer is trying to do, take it from you and sell it to the highest bidder.

I actually agree with having right to do what you want with your property. But your points seem a bit two faced. You're saying its OK for you to sell something at market rate ("to the highest bidder"), but that its not OK for the dealer to do so? If a dealer is agreeing to sell an item below market rate, forgoing some money they could have made, then why hold it against them to protect themselves from flippers?

I would have an issue with a non-expiring agreement, but I'd be happy to sign ROFR for a 1 year period on a Braptor at MSRP. If something happened and I did need to sell it then I get back all I paid for it.

Sponsored