Ford doing something about greedy dealers and flippers?

[MattIngram]

So if I purchase a Lighting with cash, can a manufacture still control what happens with that truck or car? This is what the courts will have to determine.

And the courts will use any contract that you signed to submit that order and/or take delivery of said vehicle but I’m not an attorney. It is not unconscionable to insert terms and conditions on the sale of a product, no matter how you pay for it. Apple does it all the time.

Sponsored

 

[TacoHolder]

And the courts will use any contract that you signed to submit that order and/or take delivery of said vehicle but I’m not an attorney. It is not unconscionable to insert terms and conditions on the sale of a product, no matter how you pay for it. Apple does it all the time.

Not worth your effort to get these folks to understand. They will just dig their heels in deeper and keep crying.

 

[999]

You are clearly in the minority here... lol. Shocking how many people have no IDEA how contracts work.

Sounds like unless you sign the Ford contract you can’t order the truck, and if you sign the contract then break that contract Ford has the rights. I’m not a lawyer, but signed contracts are binding.

 

[MattIngram]

Not worth your effort to get these folks to understand. They will just dig their heels in deeper and keep crying.

I just get a kick out of these freedom of choice folks trying to shout down anyone that refers to potential breaches of laws and statutes. I wore a uniform for 6 years, lost two high school sweethearts but served during peacetime, so they have those rights. Really freedom of choice to break the law, okay fella I get it, lol.

 

[Eagle11]

And the courts will use any contract that you signed to submit that order and/or take delivery of said vehicle but I’m not an attorney. It is not unconscionable to insert terms and conditions on the sale of a product, no matter how you pay for it. Apple does it all the time.

As I started the court will determine if this is valid for ford to do or not.

 

[MattIngram]

As I started the court will determine if this is valid for ford to do or not.

Re-read my last post until it makes sense, or don’t and sign but not read any piece of paper they put in front of you at the dealership. You have the choice!

 

[999]

Nuh-uh!

Ford is not the boss of me. And contracts only have meaning in Roooosha. This is Murica.

Cash, check, or loan doesn't matter, if they won't sell it to you without your signing the agreement.
and once you sign the agreement, it's binding in a court of law.

 

[Eagle11]

Not worth your effort to get these folks to understand. They will just dig their heels in deeper and keep crying.

Not sure what you mean, I fully understand the law and how it works, but as I stated, if I own the product outright, Ford should not be able to control what I do with it. It's just like all these people who are modifying their Mavericks. This is why we have a legal system, just because you sign a contract doesn't mean the contract you signed is a legal one.

 

[Eagle11]

Re-read my last post until it makes sense, or don’t and sign but not read any piece of paper they put in front of you at the dealership. You have the choice!

LOL... Just because you signed a contract doesn't mean the contract is valid or legal. You have stated you aren't a lawyer, maybe you need to talk to a lawyer.

 

[MattIngram]

LOL... Just because you signed a contract doesn't mean the contract is valid or legal. You have stated you aren't a lawyer, maybe you need to talk to a lawyer.

And that lawyer will likely tell you ignorance of what you signed is not a reason to invalidate but again I’m not a lawyer and you certainly aren’t. But you may have a case for lacking mental capacity, so go with that, lol.

 

[Rojo]

Man, this whole thread is a shit show

 

[TacoHolder]

Man, this whole thread is a shit show

What I expected from this thread:

what actually happened:

 

[DryHeat]

I’m not an attorney. I believe that false and deceptive trade practices are probably prohibited by state and federal statutes. A dealership that takes the advertised price (MSRP) on any vehicle whatsoever and sticks a market adjustment on it may be violating those laws.

You seem to be mixing the ideas of false advertising and selling over MSRP.

It may be a deceptive trade practice for a dealer to advertise a car at a price lower than they will actually sell it for. Most dealers are well aware of this and tailor their advertising to meet the legal requirements. (They often put in footnotes about other costs or limit the price to a specific stock number, for example.)

Some states require a dealer to post additional costs on a supplementary (not replacement) window sticker if they are charging above MSRP. Dealers in those states know that and do that.

But no law requires dealers to sell at MSRP. Here's some info about MSRP from the Federal Trade Commission:

Q: One of my suppliers marks its products with a Manufacturer Suggested Retail Price (MSRP). Do I have to charge this price?
A: The key word is "suggested." A dealer is free to set the retail price of the products it sells. A dealer can set the price at the MSRP or at a different price, as long as the dealer comes to that decision on its own.

So... Are you claiming that selling over MSRP is a deceptive trade practice? Or just that a dealer may commit a deceptive trade practice if they advertise a car for a lower price than they will actually sell it for?

(Note: I've read your later posts. I chose to respond to this one because it is the clearest statement of your theory.)

 

[hcforde]

It is Ford's job to police their dealers. Dealing with scalpers is your choice, just don't deal with them. The issue is Ford telling me what i can and cannot do with personal property.

Happens all the time on personal property. Zoning laws, permits for building and remodeling, HOA's etc, ets, etc!!! What about even public property that you can not access

 

[uh50]

In Texas we have the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (DTPA) and other consumer protections, just as most states do I'm sure. The primary purpose of the DTPA is to protect consumers against false, misleading, and deceptive business and insurance practices, unconscionable actions, and breaches of warranty. It does so by prohibiting certain acts and practices that tend to deceive and mislead consumers.

Most consumer transactions are covered by the DTPA. Although the DTPA does not cover every deceptive or unconscionable act or practice, it is quite broad. The DTPA provides that "false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful."

The term "unconscionable" appears frequently in the DTPA. The DTPA defines an "unconscionable action" as one that "takes advantage of the lack of knowledge, ability, experience, or capacity of a person to a grossly unfair degree."

So what does this all mean? The DTPA has a very broad application. The DTPA can be used by someone that is charged for an unnecessary $50 car repair; it can be used by someone buying a used car; it can be used by a homeowner buying a home; it can be used by a small business purchasing materials; it can be used by a business buying a $400,000 franchise; and it can be used in all transactions in between. Simply put, the DTPA was enacted to protect consumers in small transactions and businesses in rather large transactions.

I'm not an attorney either, but from my Construction Contract Law training in Construction Management courses, I remember it is unlawful for any entity in a contract including unreasonable clauses to unfairly gain advantage over the other contractual parties. And yes, a sales agreement is a contract. Again, the term "unconscionable" comes into play and an unconscionable contract is “basically” one that is “grossly one-sided.”

Obviously, there are many conditions and situations involved. One important factor in purchasing a vehicle. The dealer must provide the buyer with conditions of sale. For instance, I signed an order agreement that included pricing information on it. Although the order agreement did not bind me to the purchase, it established the price of sale. The dealer can not add unreasonable conditions in the final sales contract that are not ordinarily included in a final sales agreement.

According to an attorney, "paying over advertised MSRP Its not an unconscionable contract. Its a bad contract, but that doesn't mean you can void it. Car values are subjective and easily researched so that wont' form a basis for getting you out of the contact."

Car dealers that are deceptive, hopefully will not be in business long. All that being said, I will not do business with a car dealer that does not have a good record and has been in business for a while. In any contractual purchase, there has to be a certain amount of trust but we also must verify and read every line of a contract before signing. Trust, but verify.

Sponsored