I never liked Fords...

WOW!

Technically if a car is financed through Ford they own it. An argument could be made that they're just protecting their property from theft. Welcome to the scary future of AI-enabled shenanigans.

I think this is fine. If you can't pay for your car, why should you be allowed to keep driving it? And this avoids a tow, the car drives itself to a impound yard where you know where it is when you get your payments caught up, you can go get it.

I know this can be argued but if you can't afford to own it, you can't afford to keep driving it.

That's a very slippery slope and therefore a very bad idea.

#1 If they impound wrong vehicle. Also opens up even more hacks
#2 Defending yourself if that vehicle gets in a wreck while being impounded

I’ve got no love affair with modern Fords but I don’t mind this decision as long as it is regulated correctly. If financed through Ford, they own the car and can do what they want. This certainly seems like a better option than the repo process

This happened to me. Ford dealer in Dallas in 2012.
Had to go rebuy the car a week later. No real change in
Payments. I paid cash for my last new car, so no issues
On that deal.
The fact they didn't pay off the loan on the trade in after
Selling it off is real nasty trick. How did the next owner
get a title??? Moral of the story, pay off the car before
buying another.

F1nut wrote: »

That's a very slippery slope and therefore a very bad idea.

Informal fallacy!

Dude, in all honesty, anything built after 2007 is required, by federal law, to have a "black box" capability. It's essentially a data collector with a back door into the vehicle's ECM that police can access remotely to shut down your car in the event that you are suspected of a crime. Additionally, if the black box recording is played back in the event of an accident or other nefarious deed, the logs are admissible in court for any traffic violations, like speeding, no matter how insignificant the violation is.

That same info can be used by banks, repo companies and even dealerships and rental car companies to retrieve unsecured assets.

All this Ford idea is doing is creating software and sensors that will allow the vehicle to retrieve itself. It can cost tens of thousands of dollars per repo to retrieve defaulted assets, especially when the borrower hides the asset and makes retrieval difficult. If they can kill your car remotely or even get the car to retrieve itself, the cost of repossession goes way down. They can already kill your car remotely if it's less than 15 years old. They just want to take it a step further and have the car retrieve itself.

The fact that you're just finding out about this now because of your unreasonable hatred for a single brand is honestly, quite absurd.

Besides, Teslas have been able to do this since the "autopilot" feature was introduced. A Tesla isn't going to make it all the way to a repo yard or something by itself but it can get itself started and drive a short distance and then notify a repossession agent to it's location and to come retrieve it.

There's a reason my newest vehicle is a 2007 Lincoln MKX that I keep throwing parts at to keep running.

I remember posting a story about this back in 2006 when the legislation was passed and I said how intrusive and rights robbing it would be and people told me I was wearing my tinfoil hat too tight.

Look at all the poor guys who bought a car from Carvana
and still can't get the tittle. A couple of states have banned
them due to the issue. Expect Carvana to file for protection
this year.

Whenever I see this thread, I think of this song:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRNze9Lkgbo

Never owned a Ford and never will. They're cutting their own throat with this one.

nooshinjohn wrote: »

I never liked Fords...

I agree! I have never liked Fords, but I now own a 1997 Ford Ranger.

My very best friend gave it up because he could no longer drive a manual shift. He drove it for 112K miles so it should last for awhile.

I grew up in a Chevrolet family.

Now, I have to admit I enjoy driving it.

What I think is even worse than this idea from Ford is manufacturer's charging monthly subscriptions for things like heated seats /steering wheels or performance upgrades like extra rear wheel steering etc.

1: If the options are already on the car when you pay for it doesn't it make them yours?
2: If you're just going to put all the same equipment on every model car regardless if the owner decides not to pay for them, then aren't you just wasting resources?