Posted on 12/14/2015 6:19:22 AM PST by McGruff
The black Ford F-250 started life as a truck for a Texas-based plumbing company, carrying pipes, toilets and their ilk. But then it was sold to a Ford dealership in Houston, and after that shepherded off to parts unknown. Until, that is, it appeared as the focal point of a tweet from a supposed jihadist last December.
The photo indicated that the truck no longer carried ceramic parts; emerging from its cargo bed were a black-cloaked figure and an anti-aircraft gun shooting fire into the distance. According to the tweet, the truck was being used by Jaish al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar (or, the "Muhaijireen Brigade"), a jihadist group fighting against the Syrian government.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
He claims the dealer stopped him and that they would do it for him.
Who peels the logo off at the dealers?
I don’t believe the plumber.
“The “better†tool is a hair dryer.”
*******
Those of us who are folically challenged don’t own hair dryers.
If they did that Ford could never sell another used truck in their corporate headquarters- Dearborn, Michigan. Used trucks would be blowing up left and right.
CC
LOL!
Excellant
Smart negotiators.
The kind who are willing to walk away from the deal.
Based on your question you are probably getting ripped when you make deals.
Suppose you trade in a car at a dealership, then weeks or months later, whoever ended up with the car found out your name, business address, and phone number from the dealership, and started harassing and threatening you because of problems with the car.
Would that bother you?
The REAL problem is that the dealership failed to protect the privacy of one of it’s customers, and will have to pay a steep price for their dishonesty and/or carelessness.
Only a moron would let anything out of his/her control without removing logo or watching to verify it was done.
That the dealer sold it overseas is not the point. The dealer, when they bought the truck, had agreed to remove the logo on the truck. That is what this is all about. Their lack of due diligence in doing what was promised is the heart of the problem.
If the plumber was so concerned, he should have stripped the decals off it when he sold it. We used to do that with our trucks back in the 80’s. I am not sure why he wouldn’t have done that.
Well, the article says he started to, but the dealership told him they would do without damaging the paint.
Wellvif you read the damn article you would know
Seems like I remember another story about a Toyota pickup somebody recognized from an ISIS video.
As far as we were told, it was our responsibility to protect our brand, so we took off the decals.
Yes, I did.
It is not up to the dealer to protect your brand.
There is not a court in the country that will find for this plumber.
You might not like the answer, but that is what it is.
Not stone true, if the add / remove we owe stated the dealer removes the logo
oops
I had that happen to me once. I had traded my 88 Chevy 3/4 ton in 93 for a new F250 Diesel and they in turn sold it to some used car lot. Some folks got my info of the registration and they were considering buying the truck. They called me up and said they saw it on the lot and asked me how it ran and a bunch of other stuff and I was pretty evasive. But they were real persistent and called me back again the next day and finally I got pissed and told them it was the biggest POS lemon that ever was made, less than 75,000 miles and went through 2 engines, 4 radiators, and new front end rebuild every 25,000 miles, etc, and told them to run away from it then I hung up...
If the story is as reported, the plumber will win on breech of contract.
I’ll go further, the dealership will try and settle out in the hall at a significant percentage of what the plumber is asking.
Who wants to bet it was never written down.
It’s not about whether I like the answer you give or not, it is about the fact that the information was in the article that explains why the original owner didn’t remove the decals. He was told not to because it would adversely affect the trade-in value and that the dealership was going to perform that service (contractual obligation at that point).
I understand that.
I am telling you that as someone who has faced the exact same situation (No dealer wants a truck with 200,00 miles on it AND a ruined paint job.) I am saying that it is up to the brand holder to protect their brand.
That is why I don’t think he will win.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.