Houston-based dealer claims customers signed an agreement giving them first refusal rights during the first 18 months of ownership
2 hours ago
- A Ferrari dealer in Texas is suing a customer who sold his Purosangue SUV.
- Ferrari of Houston said Todd Carlson agreed to give him priority if he wanted to sell the company within the first 18 months of ownership.
- The $429,000 V12 crossover already had a two-year waiting list when it went on sale, so it’s ripe for resale.
What’s better than owning a Ferrari Purosangue? Own one until the novelty wears off, then flip it for a huge profit. But a Ferrari dealer in Texas didn’t give in to the shenanigans and sued a customer who sold his car.
Ferrari of Houston is taking former Purosangue owner Todd Carlson to court for violating a contract that gave the retailer first dibs on the popular SUV. According to the lawsuit filed last month in Harris County District Court, the dealer said Carlson signed an “opportunity agreement” when he made the initial deposit that included strict rules about continuing to use the Purosangue.
RELATED: Ferrari Purosangue Is Reimagined as an Off-Road Vehicle—It Could Actually Happen
According to reports, under the terms of the deal, Ferrari of Houston will have first dibs on the car if Carlson wants to sell it within 18 months of delivery in June 2024. Kabasi. The dealer would have no problem finding a new home for the Purosangue, although we imagine it would pay Carlson less than he would have received if he sold it to another party himself.
The contract also stipulated that if Carlson reneged on his promise to sell the Purosangue to someone other than a dealer within a year and a half, he would be liable to pay Houston Ferrari the profits he made and pay its attorneys’ fees. The case has yet to go to court, but it sounds like the law is on Ferrari’s side, and there are genuine potential Purosangue owners who want the chance to buy and keep the company’s first four-door machine.
Most new car buyers are free to do whatever they want to their vehicles, but this isn’t the first time we’ve encountered a situation where an automaker or its agents have come across a car after the owner tried to flip it for a profit. Ford sued actor and wrestler John Cena after he sold his GT supercar, while Tesla threatened to go after Cybertruck owners looking to make a quick buck.
Do you think Ferrari has the right to decide what buyers do with their cars? Or is this just a case of excess? Leave a comment and let us know where you stand.
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.