Non-resale clause inconsistency - is it legal?

[HaulingAss]

What's implied here, but not actually stated, is that Tesla has a reasonable amount of time to either buy it or lose that right, even if it says you need their express written permission to sell it. Any ambiguities in the contract are always read against the party that provided the contract.

Only people afraid of their own shadow, or who planned to flip it for a profit, would be fearful of buying a Cybertruck because of the no reselling clause.

Sponsored

 

[HaulingAss]

I'm a litigator and if challenged in an actual case, I wouldn't be surprised if a Court didn't enforce it on the same grounds as non-competition clauses are rejected (especially in CA) but not sure how serious Tesla themselves are in enforcing this term on people and it seems more of a scare tactic than anything.

The grounds that non-compete clauses are shot down is because courts assume everyone needs to earn a living, and if the non-compete clause states you cannot do what you know how to do, then it becomes repugnant to enforce it.

There is no parallel that exists in the no reselling clause, particularly since the clause only gives Tesla the right to buy it back first, with very reasonable depreciation, should you wish or need to sell it shortly after purchase.

Reselling clauses in purchase and sale agreements are not without a lot of previous examples, in new car sales and also in real estate and, I'm confident, in things I don't even know about. Just in new car sales there are many examples of no-resale clauses being successfully enforced. Tesla has made the flipping of vehicles problematic enough that a rational investor (I'm being kind here by referring to flippers as investors) would not find flipping a Cybertruck to be a good risk/reward.

In our society, or any modern, civilized society, contracts between consenting adults mean something, our entire economic system is dependent upon contracts between consenting adults being enforceable. I can only imagine that people arguing against this either planned to flip their reservation, or they have no reservation (at least not one with a low number).

 

[Doug McAllister]

Does anyone know if you can sell your reservation to another party

 

[jtdiddy]

the distinction I was making with non-compete clauses was not meant to be taken as an apples-to-apples comparison but more to show that just bc certain clauses are in contracts doesn't mean they are necessarily enforceable when push comes shove and the issue is actually litigated.

 

[Crissa]

Does anyone know if you can sell your reservation to another party

You cannot. There is no method to do so legally unless they're in your household or other inheritor or guardian.

-Crissa

 

[HaulingAss]

the distinction I was making with non-compete clauses was not meant to be taken as an apples-to-apples comparison but more to show that just bc certain clauses are in contracts doesn't mean they are necessarily enforceable when push comes shove and the issue is actually litigated.

Absolutely! Any contract can be litigated, even ones with "no litigation" clauses, LOL! It might get thrown out early in the process, but it can still be litigated.

I was saying there is no known reason to think the no resale clause would *not* hold up in court.

 

[jtdiddy]

Haha yea I totally get ya but maybe it's bc its what I do all day so I see little chance of it being an "enforceable" clause if truly challenged in court.

In other words, if I flip my CT and Tesla sued me on this breach of contract clause, I'd like my chances in Court.

 

[Crissa]

This isn't anti-free-market.

It's anti-parasitic-market.

-Crissa

 

[JBee]

Well presented.

The only real deterrent that would seemingly remain here is the costly litigation process, not just the enforceability of the clause. As such Tesla would likely hold the upper hand in being able to finance whatever litigation they like against a customer, if they choose to do so. This would be super onerous for a regular customer.

Once again only the "threat" is real, and that Tesla can justify resorting to this form of customer manipulation is dubious at best. I can't stop thinking someone snuck it in without EM knowing.

Sponsored