Maverick Resale Restriction by Dealer

[PRH]

I had to sign something similar in Canada (no resale, specifically no resale to the USA) but it didn't mention anything about giving excess money back to the dealer. Kiss my *maverick would be my response to that (tho, to be fair, I'd never sell within a year anyway given the depreciation... but maybe not so in this market🤷🏻‍) and I guess if you've waited for months upon months. I wonder if any of that is REALLY enforceable?

Sponsored

 

[RLader]

I could see it partially. It could have been used to stop what has happened a lot. People who could afford 5 or 6, ordering them (possibly even dealer's relatives ordering to sell back to them), then going immediately to sell it for a hefty profit with 40-50 miles on it. If this were the case, it needed to be done from the get go and not now.

As far as the dealer trying to line their pockets, I have a major problem with that, and the other part is to force the buyer to walk away, then do a large ADM for themselves. That way, they profit either way.

Wjat happens when six months after purchase, the wife has twins and suddenly the Maverick is not big enough and has to be replaced with something bigger? Like the other poster, unless it is done across the board, I thing there is a legal problem.

My first thought is how are they going to find out what you sold it for. As far as finding out you sold it I can see several ways they could find that out. But I'm not going to tell them what I sold it for.

 

[flashfearless]

I don’t think I’d be able to keep a straight face as I sign it and hand it back. I would not give a flying f about what was on that paper. Unenforceable.

 

[RLader]

So who's going to tell dealer that the truck has been sold? Are they going to get access to the secretary of state's records and then bring in the dealer police and file lawsuits (costing thousands) just so you will 'get your mind straight'? No, it's not enforceable and just some scare tactic.

Would you buy a low mileage, less than a year old Maverick and not transfer the warranty? Or if that same dealer services it they would know who originally bought it.

 

[Bubba995]

They would track through DMV, same way they keep up with recalls.

 

[jpdurr]

Not enforceable and not willing to enforce are very different things. To not be enforceable it would have to be shown it violates the law, is in conflict with other terms, or get the court to invalidate it.

People put terms on what can be done with property post sale all the time. Frequently it is with real restate, which has its own set of laws. But the concept that the seller has stake in what happens to property post sale is not unusual and absolutely enforceable in many if not all states.

absolute nonesense. It is enforcable if both parties agreed to it. Has nothing to do with

So who's going to tell dealer that the truck has been sold? Are they going to get access to the secretary of state's records and then bring in the dealer police and file lawsuits (costing thousands) just so you will 'get your mind straight'? No, it's not enforceable and just some scare tactic.

It is enforceable (as a matter of Law), rather it might not be practical to enforce it. There is a difference.

 

[lajlmt]

How the Ford Motor Company stays in business is beyond me.

Government subsidies

 

[Bj517]

To everyone knee jerk replying "unenforceable" - you don't know that. Every state's laws are different. OP's friend would have to talk to a local attorney to determine if it's enforceable or not

 

[gte105u]

absolute nonesense. It is enforcable if both parties agreed to it. Has nothing to do with

It is enforceable (as a matter of Law), rather it might not be practical to enforce it. There is a difference.

I find it highly unlikely you are knowledgeable enough in consumer protection laws of all 50 states to make this comment with accuracy. Law trumps contract. Seems likely there are states that would override or limit this, and states that wouldn't.

In either case it seems unlikely the dealer will deal with the hassle of pursuing for a low return vehicle like a Maverick.

 

[jpdurr]

yes, my three years in Law School, Passing Multiple Bar Exams, and then practicing Law for 11 years demonstrates that I'm just blowing smoke.


I stand by what I wrote above. It is not based on conjecture.

 

[gte105u]

yes, my three years in Law School, Passing Multiple Bar Exams, and then practicing Law for 11 years demonstrates that I'm just blowing smoke.


I stand by what I wrote above. It is not based on conjecture.

You're either not a lawyer, a horrible one, or just like to mouth off. A good lawyer would know your own limitations. That means there is no way you are familiar with every state's laws enough to make the claim you did.

I'm going with internet blowhard pretending to be a lawyer but could be wrong.

 

[jpdurr]

all states contract law are fundamentally the same. They do differ but not on basic principles.

 

[MrHomeGuy]

I always sign with my middle name as First name "mickey mouse" last name

 

[SValline]

It's a scare tactic. Nothing more. They were doing that on houses in California around 2007 before the collapse - had to sell it back to the builder if you bought a new home and sold it or rented it out in the first 3 years. Our agent said to sign it and watch them try to make you do something with YOUR property. Sell it the next day, if you want, they can't do a thing about it. It's YOUR PROPERTY. This BS goes away when the market cools. Like some others have said, reverse it on them so they take the loss for you when the vehicle depreciates. Just as stupid.

Sponsored