By on May 17, 2018

Following the private sale of his Ford GT, superstar wrestler John Cena found himself looking down the barrel of the automaker’s legal team. Ford had publicized that the chosen recipients of the exclusive model were forbidden from selling it within the first two years of taking delivery. Cena was in breach of contract, or so it initially seemed.

Things became murky when the former “Doctor of Thuganomics” had his legal council point out that the dealer’s sales agreement included no such clause. The matter is now before the courts, with Ford seeking damages and Cena asking for dismissal.

Keeping that in mind, it’s more than a little surprising that another second-generation GT is being offered for sale just a few months later. The vehicle in question is number 48 out of 250 from the 2017 model year — and it’s currently up for auction in Indianapolis. 

Spotted by Motor Authority, the supercar has a suspiciously low number of miles on it. With the odometer clocking in at just seven miles, we have to wonder if the intent was to flip this car all along.

Ford has previously green lit charity auctions, but for-profit bids are expressly forbidden under its resale restrictions. The automaker had little to say after the outlet reached out to Ford for comment on the pending auction.

“We are aware of this situation and looking into it, however Ford does not comment on individual customer matters. What we can say is that all Ford GT customers sign contracts, which include an agreement not to sell the car for at least two years,” said Ford spokesman Matt Leaver.

Considering the touchy and somewhat confusing nature of the Cena case, we’re not sure how Ford plans to handle the auction. The Ford GT order confirmation stipulates that future owners acknowledge they understand that they are “being selected for the opportunity to purchase this vehicle is non-transferable and agree not to sell the vehicle within the first 24 months of delivery.” However, dealerships typically establish the final purchasing price and all other terms of sale.

If the retailer of GT number 48 forgot to include the sales restriction clause, then Ford would have a much harder time suspending the auction. Either way, the automaker will need to act fast before this becomes messier than it already is. The gavel drops this week.

[Images: Mecum Auctions]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

27 Comments on “Another Ford GT Owner Attempts to Flip Ride, This Time at Auction...”


  • avatar
    "scarey"

    My Mother told me to save money. Maybe if I had listened to her, I could afford to buy one of these magnificent objects. But Alas, my wage for cleaning my room and helping my sister with the dishes was twenty-five cents a week. And I loved going to the movies on Saturday. Oh, Well…

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    And they couldn’t even bother to vacuum the driver’s footwell, or dust around the speedo/odometer display. It’s like a Craigslist car. Sheesh.

    • 0 avatar
      St.George

      I concur, the dust around the odometer is extremely off-putting. When I see this on an Autotrader ad, that’s bad enough, but on multi-million dollar, 7 mile GT, no excuse!!

    • 0 avatar
      Middle-Aged (Ex-Miata) Man

      It’s not quite CL-bad, but the dust and dirty floor mats stood out to me, too.

      I also hadn’t noticed until now that the GT suffers from “DLO Fail” behind the door glass. Sheesh, I’m sick of plastic filler panels…

  • avatar
    civicjohn

    Man, I wish I had Leno money, I’d pay everything necessary to scoop this up.

    Double-digit appreciation every year.

  • avatar
    eggsalad

    I’m by no means a lawyer, but I think the argument in the Cena case is valid.

    Ford doesn’t sell cars to people. Ford sells cars to dealers. Therefore, the purchaser of a car has no agreement with, nor obligation to, Ford Motor Company.

    So… if anyone can be punished by Ford Motor Company, it’s the dealer, not the end buyer.

    But even in that case, once Ford sells a GT to the dealer, the dealer owns it and is free to do with the car as it sees fit. FoMoCo might attempt to pull the dealer’s franchise, but I’m not even sure that would hold up in court.

    • 0 avatar
      Deanh

      incorrect, Ford sold the cars direct to the customers…NOT the dealers…they received a token delivery fee from Ford.

    • 0 avatar
      jpolicke

      Agreed. Call Ford to complain about your dealer screwing you and they will waste no time explaining how the dealer is an independent business and they can’t help you. Can’t have it both ways.

      • 0 avatar
        Malforus

        There was a whole thing where various previous agreements that had been communicated to Cena may supercede the signed document…yadda yadda yadda.

        I expect there will be a settlement of some kind but at this point with it going to trial our opinions on the matter only matter in the “This is a bad look for ford”.

        They really should have gone full EV1 on the situation and forced it to be leased.

    • 0 avatar
      Deanh

      incorrect, Ford sold the cars direct to the customers…NOT the dealers…they received a token delivery fee from Ford.

    • 0 avatar
      rudiger

      My thoughts, as well. Ford is trying to enforce a contract as the original seller, but the original buyer was actually the dealer. As stated, the dealership had made no such stipulation in the sales contract to the customer. It’s really rather amusing since Ford made all these legal stipulations, yet they are all meaningless if the dealership didn’t put any of them into the secondary sales contract.

      In fact, didn’t the dealership violate the contract and the one who should have held onto the car for at least two years? It’s like selling a car to someone with the knowledge that they’re going to immediately resell it to someone else, and telling ‘that’ person that they now can’t sell it for another two years.

  • avatar
    Dan R

    I recognize that gray. My 1993 Ranger has the same (color) interior. The pattern beneath the odometer is the same as that on the seat fabric. Make me an offer. No legal entanglements.

    • 0 avatar
      dukeisduke

      Ingot Silver is a color they’ve had around for awhile, too. A few years ago I was looking for E-350 15-passenger vans for a friend, to help them find a replacement when their old one’s 6.8l V10 bit the dust. A lot of the ones I was seeing for sale were Ingot Silver. You’d think they’d at least offer exclusive paint colors for these, instead of the same ones used on full-size vans from five years ago.

  • avatar
    mcs

    Soon, Chevrolet will probably sell you all the C8’s you want no strings attached. I wonder what kind of a C8 you’ll be able to get at a third of the price of the GT.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      It’s a very mediocre supercar, but this is Ford.

      Actually, the worst aspect of it is probably the motor, which is a heavily massaged Ford EcoBoost six cylinder that sounds like sh!t.

      The good aspects of this have little to do with anything Ford truly contributed; it’s a vehicle that Ford had Magna Styer (an Austrian-Canadian company) produce for it, in Ontario, Canada.

      • 0 avatar
        Deanh

        geez…who did the active aero, who designed the car, who did the suspension….where its put together does not mean its where the car was developed….

    • 0 avatar
      SunnyvaleCA

      >>> I wonder what kind of a C8 you’ll be able to get at a third of the price of the GT. <<<

      Actually, you'll be able to get a far more fun C8 than GT… one with rear wheel drive, a great sounding V8, and, most importantly, a stick shift.

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        I wonder if the owner of the GT was getting a little nervous seeing the spy shots of the C-8. Even the “Ace of Base” version is going to be really awesome. What’s the base price now, $56k?

        • 0 avatar
          Deanh

          youre kidding right?…the mid engined vette will NOT start at a base of $56k….and we have no idea how many will be produced and at what price…remember, when the GT was first announced there were speculations the price would start at 250k…wonder what happened there.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    I wonder if John Cena’s “You Can’t See Me” shtick will hold up in court?

  • avatar
    Fred

    Next time Ford should work up the warranty that says you have to drive the car at least 100 miles a week, attend at least 2 track events a year and 3 car shows. Failure to maintain your car in such a manner will require you to bring in your car for an adjustment. That being to let the mechanics hoon your car.

    I’ve only seen this car once at an IMSA event. If the purpose of this car was to show off Ford’s tech, then it’s failing because people don’t put this car on the road.

    • 0 avatar
      Deanh

      strange , because one of the parameters Ford stipulated in their vetting buyers is , they wanted the car driven. I presume to garner public attention to the brand…

  • avatar
    W.Minter

    Ford probably just developed a not-so-great contract. It could be much easier if it was a lease deal: Not 0% down, but 100% down. 24 mo. Punishment for low miles at the end. Punishment for high miles. Punishment for driving too slow. Punishment for tracking it not enough. Punishment for tracking it too much. Service every 6 mo, mandatory. At the end of the lease, you may or may not be given the car for free, depending on some instagram metrics. Now sign the dotted line, rich morons. Best, Ford GT Bank, a division of Kafka Bank.

    • 0 avatar
      Hydromatic

      Or Ford could have done what Ferrari and Brabham did and make the Ford GT a track-only car. Throw in that 24-month lease with restrictive terms for good measure.

  • avatar
    Middle-Aged (Ex-Miata) Man

    “Ford had publicized that the chosen recipients of the exclusive model were forbidden from selling it within the first two years of taking delivery.”

    The ‘do not resell’ clause was likely part of the initial ownership application process for the GT (remember, Ford denied many prospective buyers the ‘privilege’ of buying one) versus the final dealer sales contract. I don’t like it, but as long as language to that effect is written somewhere on any document signed by the initial buyer as part of the process of owning a GT I think Ford has a case.

  • avatar
    SuperCarEnthusiast

    Will Ford finally win a bout this time around? Doubt it, since possession is 99% of the law!

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      No matter what, Ford loses. It’s a stupid waste of time. Who cares if someone sells their damned car. Why are they wasting their money on a stupid marketing gimmick that’s over with at this point? Let it go.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • rpn453: The Micra is still available in Canada at an MSRP of CDN$10500 (US$7900). I’d be interested in test...
  • thegamper: Pure speculation on my part, but I would think as more luxury automakers get EV’s to market with...
  • Rocket: I don’t see it. For one, it’s a lot of money to spend. But more important, Toyota is all about...
  • Giskard: Unlike other cars an electric car is likely to “know” it’s plugged in. My i3s, for...
  • Lie2me: I agree, or at least greatly reduce the amount of salt used. Here in southern Wisconsin I appreciate that...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States