By Muhammed Hashim 
- A Ferrari dealer in Texas is suing one of its customers for selling on their Purosangue SUV.
- Ferrari of Houston says Todd Carlson agreed to give it first refusal if he wanted to sell in the first 18 months of ownership.
- The $429,000 V12 crossover had a two-year waiting list at launch, making it ripe for flipping.
What’s even better than owning a Ferrari Purosangue? Owning one until the novelty wears off and then flipping it for a massive profit. But a Ferrari dealer in Texas isn’t down with those kind of shenanigans and suing a customer for selling his own car.
var adpushup = window.adpushup = window.adpushup || {que:[]};
adpushup.que.push(function() {
if (adpushup.config.platform !== “DESKTOP”){
adpushup.triggerAd(“4d84e4c9-9937-4f84-82c0-c94544ee6f2a”);
}
else{
adpushup.triggerAd(“6a782b01-facb-45f3-a88f-ddf1b1f97657”);
} });
Ferrari of Houston is taking former Purosangue owner Todd Carlson to court for breaking a contract that gave the retailer first refusal on the in-demand SUV. According to a suit filed in the Harris County District Court last month, the dealer says Carlson signed an “Opportunity Agreement” when placing his initial deposit that included strict rules about moving the Purosangue on.
Related: Ferrari Purosangue Reimagined As An Off-Roader – And It Could Actually Happen
Under the terms of the deal Carlson agreed to give Ferrari of Houston first refusal on the car if he wanted to sell it within 18 months of taking delivery in June 2024, as reported by Carbuzz. The dealer would have no trouble finding a new home for the Purosangue, though we imagine it would want to pay Carlson less than he could achieve by selling it himself to another party.
var adpushup = window.adpushup = window.adpushup || {que:[]};
adpushup.que.push(function() {
if (adpushup.config.platform !== “DESKTOP”){
adpushup.triggerAd(“5646c171-cb6e-4e2c-8440-49013ca72758”);
}
else{
adpushup.triggerAd(“e7c4c913-3924-4b2d-9279-6c00984dd130”);
} });
The contract also stipulated that if Carlson reneged on the deal and sold the Purosangue to someone other than the dealer within the first year and a half, he would be liable to pay Ferrari of Houston the profit he made and cover its legal fees. The case has yet to come to court, but it sounds like the law is on Ferrari’s side, along with genuine would-be Purosangue owners who would have loved a chance to buy and keep the firm’s first four-door machine.
Most new car buyers are free to do what they want with their vehicles, but this isn’t the first case we’ve come across where automakers or their agents have come after owners trying to flip for a profit. Ford sued actor and wrestler John Cena after he sold his GT supercar and Tesla threatened to chase down Cybertruck owners looking to make a quick buck.
Do you think Ferrari has the right to dictate what buyers do with their cars? Or is this just a case of overreach? Drop a comment and let us know where you stand.
var adpushup = window.adpushup = window.adpushup || {que:[]};
adpushup.que.push(function() {
if (adpushup.config.platform !== “DESKTOP”){
adpushup.triggerAd(“e96f0476-8b1d-4bb8-b64c-33f9656987b2”);
}
else{
adpushup.triggerAd(“0f9edca9-aa84-4c07-8987-4cad23928c2d”);
} });
