Filed under: Sports/GTs, Government/Legal, Shelby
Carroll Shelby sued by Unique Performance customers
Carroll Shelby has seen it all. He's raised chickens and flew planes in WWII. He's raced in Formula One and partnered with all three of America's automakers. And then some. At 85 years old, Shelby deserves praise – like the Automotive Executive of the Year and Lifetime Achievement awards the iconic muscle-car guru is set to receive this year. But what is he getting instead? Sued.
Frustrated by their misfortune with the ongoing Unique Performance saga, a group of customers are trying to sue Shelby to get their money back on classic Shelby Mustangs that they ordered from the now defunct company but never received. Shelby licensed his name to Unique Performance for restored pony cars, but seeing the writing on the wall early, severed ties with the company shortly thereafter. Either way, Unique Performance was at fault for its own screw-ups, not Shelby. Yet the plaintiffs are arguing that "no one would have ordered these cars if it wasn't for Carroll Shelby." That may be the case, and we can understand the disappointed customers' frustrations. But leave Grandpa Carroll alone. Thanks for the tip, Ralph!
[Source: CBS3.com]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Rob 2:32PM (4/02/2008)
I would consider him at least partially responsible. Maybe he should be more diligent before lending his name to a company. I think it's likely Shelby didn't lose money on the deal.
Reply
James 2:34PM (4/02/2008)
I agree. While I don't think Shelby is entirely at fault for Unique Performance's horrible business ethics, he should recognize that these customers bought the cars partially because of the reputable and recognizable name of Shelby.
geo.stewart 3:07PM (4/02/2008)
nukfuts.
you going to sue Ferrari for a slow Acer laptop? no.
you suing Eddie Bauer for that Bronco II that flipped? no.
Shelby didnt buy the vehicles, didnt restore the vehicles, and didnt sell the vehicles.
I dont believe Shelby is an angel but he didnt buy a stake in the company and he wasnt employed by the company. Anyone buying the car because of his name was an idiot.
Just another example of someone suing someone because they have money. yeah, Unique is who you should be suing and if they dont have any money, you are either SOL or go after the D&Os. Either they have D&O insurance or get future wages garnished.
kc 3:13PM (4/02/2008)
What about the Foose Camaro? Is Chip responsible there too?
Randy 1:16PM (4/03/2008)
hello? He was diligent! The licensing was done, Unique screwed up, he took his license back. That's pretty cut and dry. He's not responsible for anything other than his license to Unique!
We could also say that Global Warming is his fault too because he made sports cars right?
Mike V. 2:39PM (4/02/2008)
Ummm sorry, Carrol Shelby is not the angel you described.
He is a terrible business man who had some great ideas and was a decent race car driver.
Sure he holds a place in history, but he should not be on as high of a level as you are placing him.
Reply
LMBVette 3:34PM (4/02/2008)
Thanks Mike V., you beat me to the punch.
I don't feel bad for Carrol Shelby one bit. He did some good things in the auto business, but car collectors are the ones that made him famous. Those people painstakingly documented all the various Shelby's out there. They are the ones that turned that name into what it is today.
Shelby has never turned away a chance to make a buck. He displays no loyalty. Greed is all that drives him.
Mike V. 2:43PM (4/02/2008)
You are absolutely right. People wanted cars from Unique because they had the "authentic Shelby name on them"
"Shelby" is what people put up the big money for. He is the man behind the name.
This ranks up with many of his business dealings, shady and failed.
Sorry, the man is no automotive angel. Hell he'll sue anyone on here just for using his name in vain. He is a very demeening person and his charity isnt' exactly the most charitable either.
Reply
geo.stewart 3:33PM (4/02/2008)
yeah, shelby knows cars and has designed some great ones but that's about as far as he goes for any kind of model of society. his charity has given away about 1% of its holdings and sitting underneath a live oak isnt as shady as his business dealings but none of that has any bearing here.
Hootan 4:50PM (4/02/2008)
Hmm, tough one to figure out. But I do agree with LMBVette, Shelby has diluted his own brand a bit by teaming up with just about anyone. Remember the Oldsmobile tie-up?
Chris 11:43PM (4/02/2008)
He has a charity!? Is it still April Fool's?
Those who know understand.....
Pete 2:43PM (4/02/2008)
Partially...try the only reason. You buy something with his name on it because the consumer expects a quality product. There is no mistaking the equity of the Shelby name, these people were screwed over and someone should have to refund them. This isn't good for Carroll.
Reply
Shawn 2:58PM (4/02/2008)
So you can sue Michael Jorden if you bought a pair of Nikes and they never showed up?
Reply
Paul P. 3:06PM (4/02/2008)
That was my thought. It doesn't make much sense to me, but I'm not a lawyer and I don't know all the facts, so I'm not going to cast judgement on either.
Forrest Tosie 3:04PM (4/02/2008)
When I was 8 years old I wanted a BB gun and didn't get it. Maybe I should sue Santa.
Gimme a break - Carroll Shelby wasn't the one (supposedly) building cars - Unique was. It's just the litigious society we live in - sue everyone for everything.
Reply
Icon149 3:24PM (4/02/2008)
You'll shoot your eye out kid...
Franz 3:06PM (4/02/2008)
I don't think he can be held responsible. Sure people were willing to buy these cars mainly because they were dubbed as "Shelbys" but it would seem to me that only Unique is liable. They were using his name under license, but it was their company and their cars. If you ordered a new pair of Air Jordans, they weren't delivered and the Jordan brand suddenly went belly up, would you sue Michael Jordan, Nike or the store you ordered them from? 'm not saying that it's the same thing or that Shelby is a saint, but I just don't see how he can be held liable for Unique's screw-ups.
Reply
mk 3:20PM (4/02/2008)
Brand equity is probably true.
But Unique was licensed to produce the cars, NOT Shelby American, or Carroll himself.
This is a failure to deliver or produce a product Unique is in breach of contract with both the buyers AND Shelby.
Unique is the one to go after, Shelby had no liability to produce the product if Unique Performance did not, and the Shelby name may be a marketing value, but it is not an explicit guarantee.
If you bought a product from Unique Performance, and Unique Performance failed, it is their liability, or your loss if they have no way to repay. The guys in charge from Unique Performance are up to their eyeballs in this.
Shelby is a marketing arrangement, and nothing more, unless the contract held Shelby himself, or Shelby American, inc. liable to fulfill any production promises, which I highly doubt.
Reply
Level 3:32PM (4/02/2008)
Technically they have a right to sue C.S for some of the fault, By C.S giving license agreement to U.P to build cars under C.S name; this gave U.P credibility to its customers to dump upwards of 200k for those cars. It’s a case about fraud….and I am pretty sure that’s the angle they are going after C.S….Because it’s up to C.S to keep taps on U.P. to make sure they are not committing fraud with it’s name. The owner is still responsible to a point for how its name was used in and during business transactions….
Reply
Barry 3:36PM (4/02/2008)
Maybe turnabout is fair play. Shelby has sued just about everybody who even uttered the word "Cobra" without his permission. And he's not exactly a paragon of straight-laced business himself. Hell, Unique probably got their prison labor idea from Shelby. I seem to recall he relied on the Nevada Department of Corrections for some work. There may be more to the story regarding Shelby's involvement with Unique than what's on the surface.
Reply