Seeking Alpha

Ford set to face third trial in 12-year deal lawsuit

  • Ford (F) may have to go trial for a third time in a 12-year lawsuit in which dealers have accused the company of breaching an agreement to publish prices for medium and heavy trucks, forcing them to pay more from 1987-1998.
  • In the first trial in 2011, Judge Peter Corrigan told Ford to pay $2B to a class of about 3,000 dealers, but a state appeals court overturned the ruling. Ford won the second trial in September, but Corrigan believes that the jury in that hearing was confused and has ordered a third trial.
  • Ford intends to appeal that latest ruling and have the second jury's verdict reinstated.
Comments (9)
  • LouSav
    , contributor
    Comments (12) | Send Message
     
    I don't know the details but If there is any truth to the accusation Ford should settle out of court.

     

    Bottom line you can't keep having never ending court cases until you get your way.
    9 Feb, 08:10 AM Reply Like
  • Tdot
    , contributor
    Comments (3435) | Send Message
     
    Lou - with apparently around $2B at stake (plus compounding interest), Ford absolutely owes it to their shareholders to spend a few million if necessary over several years to vigorously defend the legality of their wholesale pricing practices with their dealerships, especially since they were victorious in two of three court case judgements. Of course there is no guarantee that Ford will prevail once again. If they do ultimately prevail, then Ford stands to win damages of the costs of their defense. If they ultimately lose, they have already had the previous court-ordered funds held in escrow as required throughout the appellate process.
    9 Feb, 08:52 AM Reply Like
  • allanstewart
    , contributor
    Comments (26) | Send Message
     
    Something is incredibly wrong with our court system. When anyone - corporation or individual - is forced to defend themselves three times at the whim of a single man, it should be a red flag for us all. The appeals court would only have overturned the first verdict and ordered a re-trail if they believed there was something significantly improper in the way the first trial was conducted. When Ford was re-tried, presumably in accordance with the Appellant Court requirements, the jury found in favor of the the defendant. So the same judge decides that the jury, which he instructed and oversaw the selection of, was so confused that their verdict must be ignored.
    Don't think this is OK because Ford is a big company - there is not a separate judicial system for large corporation and ordinary citizens. And if you think it is OK because Ford is really guilty of wrongdoing, then you are saying that our courts need unlimited bites at the apple to deliver justice - which brings me back to my opening sentence.
    9 Feb, 09:32 AM Reply Like
  • Miro Kefurt
    , contributor
    Comments (639) | Send Message
     
    There is no MSRP requirement for over 10,000 GVWR trucks, thus there is not even any set price or Monroney Label. This is a really silly affair. Just try to find a price for ISUZU, HINO, FUSO, etc.
    9 Feb, 11:48 AM Reply Like
  • starcorral
    , contributor
    Comments (326) | Send Message
     
    This is comedic; but then I am a pretty funny guy.
    10 Feb, 11:07 AM Reply Like
  • Engineer&Far
    , contributor
    Comments (105) | Send Message
     
    Perhaps Ford needs to follow in Tesla's footsteps, and start "direct sales" to the public. Ever since Craigslist got big, I've bought all my cars there. I have the cars checked out by an independent mechanic, and have been extremely pleased with these cars & trucks, as opposed to that 'ripped off' feeling I always got from a Dealer.
    11 Feb, 10:16 AM Reply Like
  • Tdot
    , contributor
    Comments (3435) | Send Message
     
    In the United States, direct manufacturer auto sales are prohibited in almost every state by franchise laws requiring that new cars be sold only by dealers. Of course, used cars are exempt, and most dealers sell them almost as a side business.
    http://1.usa.gov/12sIHfx
    11 Feb, 11:18 AM Reply Like
  • Engineer&Far
    , contributor
    Comments (105) | Send Message
     
    It's time to challenge these ancient franchise laws. Tesla is doing so, and Ford could certainly afford to join in. If nothing else, it might improve their dealers attitudes.
    12 Feb, 10:27 AM Reply Like
  • Tdot
    , contributor
    Comments (3435) | Send Message
     
    OK - talk to your respective state Governors and Legislative Bodies. They own their laws. The real automakers follow the laws of the land that were specifically put in place to prevent what you want - which is a a cartel monopoly or oligopoly on car pricing, and price fixing by region and such. Those laws were set up because of the old turn of the century monopolies that controlled everything in the US. In fact that was a huge hurdle that Henry Ford had to overcome in US Court in order to freely build any automobiles. They probably don't teach about that though in Engineering School, do they? Watch "The Men Who Built America" for a taste.
    12 Feb, 12:43 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|