Koenigsegg in trouble

[McLaren]

According to swedish newspaper Aftonbladet (www.aftonbladet.se) the previous owner of a Koenigsegg CCX is sueing the company for six million kronor (approx. € 700 000).

It's the norwegian business man Tommy Sharif that bought a CCX, had it for a week, then crashed it while driving on a closed track during an event. After this he returned the car and commissioned Koenigsegg to sell it for him. The car was sold to a member of the family that owns Hennes & Mauritz. A couple of days later, the very same car crashed again by the way.

Tommy Sharif now claims that Koenigsegg has received the money from the last buyer but then failed to forward the money to him. Instead it is reported that Koenigsegg has offered mr. Sharif shares in the company totalling a value of six million kronor. This does not interest mr. Sharif as he intends to use the money to buy a Bugatti Veyron instead. So now he has filed for the court to render Koenigsegg bankrupt.

It's going to be interesting to follow this story as it unfolds.

This, and the CXXR incident are definately not going to help them launch the CCGT very well, and convince FIA buyers.

 

[davygravy]

This, and the CXXR incident are definately not going to help them launch the CCGT very well, and convince FIA buyers.

Why would anybody try to bankrupt a company! What's the gain! It's just infuriating.

 

[Jondot]

Because most people who can afford to crash a supercar and buy another don't like it when their money is in someone else's bank account.

It's a shame, really, but I don't understand why Koenigsegg didn't just give him his money. But still, stock in Koenigsegg can't be a bad thing.

 

[Mark T]

Why would anybody try to bankrupt a company! What's the gain! It's just infuriating.

Exactly. if you bankrupt the company the only people who get any money are those who have a charge against it. Mr Sharif is doing it because he can. He won't gain anything from it and I doubt he will get his money back.

 

[YSSMAN]

- Idiot driver crashes car while racing
- Idiot driver feels like he is entitled to compensation for his stupid driving
- Koenigsegg buys into Idiot driver demands
- One more Idiot driver crashes the car
- Now both Idiots want Koenigsegg dead?

...When was the last time you saw some 'tard try to get his money back after he wrecked his Ferrari or Porsche?

 

[JCE]

Seriously YSSMAN, at least those drivers have some sort of sense and or morality--speaking of the Ferrari/Porsche drivers. When they wreck their cars they know it's their fault and not the company's. You wreck a car shame on you not the company. This dude that's suing needs a kick in the nuts.

 

[Alex.]

yeah they crashed the 606,000 CCXR in top gear.

 

[Jondot]

yeah they crashed the 606,000 CCXR in top gear.

No, the senior engineer of Koenigsegg crashed the car with a member of the Topgear team in the passenger seat. (And what has this got to do with this thread?)

 

[GT40 MKII]

what?!?!? Koenigsegg bankrupt???? tell me this isnt true?

 

[Alex.]

No, the senior engineer of Koenigsegg crashed the car with a member of the Topgear team in the passenger seat. (And what has this got to do with this thread?)

that it will cost them cash (alot) to replace a one of a kind 606 grand car

 

[Philly]

I can't see this going through as a fair, logically done case. I hope that the Norwegian courts are not idiot enough to let this thing go anywhere. Here, it might. This guy owned a Koenigsegg. He has the dough and probably the guts to rig it in some way. I hope idiots won't win this.

 

[McLaren]

- Idiot driver crashes car while racing
- Idiot driver feels like he is entitled to compensation for his stupid driving
- Koenigsegg buys into Idiot driver demands
- One more Idiot driver crashes the car
- Now both Idiots want Koenigsegg dead?

...When was the last time you saw some 'tard try to get his money back after he wrecked his Ferrari or Porsche?

Seriously YSSMAN, at least those drivers have some sort of sense and or morality--speaking of the Ferrari/Porsche drivers. When they wreck their cars they know it's their fault and not the company's. You wreck a car shame on you not the company. This dude that's suing needs a kick in the nuts.

He's not sueing because he crashed fellows.

He's sueing because they didn't give him his money. When he gave the car back, he asked Konigsegg to sell it for him and give him the money when it was sold. After it was sold, it was discovered instead of giving him the money he asked for, he was offered shares in the company. He didn't want that.

And frankly, I don't blame this guy. If some company like Ferrari pulled this on me, I'd be taking legal action, too. I want the money, not the shares of a company whose had small financial problems before.

 

[exigeracer]

- Idiot driver crashes car while racing
- Idiot driver feels like he is entitled to compensation for his stupid driving
- Koenigsegg buys into Idiot driver demands
- One more Idiot driver crashes the car
- Now both Idiots want Koenigsegg dead?

...When was the last time you saw some 'tard try to get his money back after he wrecked his Ferrari or Porsche?

Exactly. if you bankrupt the company the only people who get any money are those who have a charge against it. Mr Sharif is doing it because he can. He won't gain anything from it and I doubt he will get his money back.

Why would anybody try to bankrupt a company! What's the gain! It's just infuriating.

Are you guys kidding me?!?!!?

You hire a real estate agent to sell your house, and when he does, he doesn't give you your money. You'll want your money, even if it means he can't sell houses anymore.

This is nobody's fault but Koenigsegg's. He is entitled to his money, regardless of Koenigsegg's financial stupidity. What did they do with the sale money anyways?

 

[YSSMAN]

Are you guys kidding me?!?!!?

You hire a real estate agent to sell your house, and when he does, he doesn't give you your money. You'll want your money, even if it means he can't sell houses anymore.

This is nobody's fault but Koenigsegg's. He is entitled to his money, regardless of Koenigsegg's financial stupidity. What did they do with the sale money anyways?

Ooops, I read the thing wrong. My bad.

...Still, I don't get why he wanted to sell the thing after he crashed it... Its kinda, you know, his fault that it happened.

 

[McLaren]

Ooops, I read the thing wrong. My bad.

...Still, I don't get why he wanted to sell the thing after he crashed it... Its kinda, you know, his fault that it happened.

After he crashed, he probably didn't want it, so he re-sold it. It's much like a couple of the Enzos that have been crashed. The owners didn't want to repair them, even though Ferrari picked them up, and rebuilt them.

 

[exigeracer]

It could be his fault he crashed, we don't know, but it is Koenigsegg's fault if they go bankrupt.

 

[Gonz013]

Konigsegg has a reputation for great customer service (and for tempremental cars), so its no surprise they were willing to sell the car - but they should have bought it back for a reduced price, (taking into account the damage).

Its a shame that it's willingness to help out a customer by selling their crashed car has caused this situation. This sort of crap always ends up hurting other consumers, as the company is less likely to be helpful to others.

I find it hard to believe they could go bankrupt for that amount though - does anyone know it the amount being claimed is much larger?

But all that aside, why would anyone buy a Konigsegg in the first place, when they could get a Bugatti Veryon?

 

[McLaren]

Konigsegg has a reputation for great customer service (and for tempremental cars), so its no surprise they were willing to sell the car - but they should have bought it back for a reduced price, (taking into account the damage).

Its a shame that it's willingness to help out a customer by selling their crashed car has caused this situation. This sort of crap always ends up hurting other consumers, as the company is less likely to be helpful to others.

I find it hard to believe they could go bankrupt for that amount though - does anyone know it the amount being claimed is much larger?

But all that aside, why would anyone buy a Konigsegg in the first place, when they could get a Bugatti Veryon?

You're not understanding. He's not sueing because he crashed the car. He's sueing because they didn't give him the money for the sale.

It's like you asking me to sell your car, then me pocketing the money, and trying to give you some sort of other payment.

 

[Rusty*]

This is just so Predictable!!
There are to many people capable of getting there a** in the seat of something like that, thast really powerful or what not. But they dont even know the first thing about how to drive there Grandma's Rolla!!! Damn these fools are so stupid, oh and Konisegg need to open there eyes, these dudes that can get there hands on cars like that are almost always going to be little ****s. So thats why they need a really strong purchase agreement etc. If you crash the car, your fault buddy!!! If you want us to buy it back??? WHAT BUY IT BACK!!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!! WHAT WHERE THEY THINKING!!! Could not one dude see in that bussiness, that doing something like that would be a real trouble maker.
There both as stupid as each other, the court case would be nothing less than entertaining lol

 

[Alex.]

But all that aside, why would anyone buy a Konigsegg in the first place, when they could get a Bugatti Veryon?

Ahem.

infact, forget it il make a whole thread about it

 

[Jondot]

that it will cost them cash (alot) to replace a one of a kind 606 grand car

Ahh, gotcha. It's just the way you said it sounded like you hadn't read the thread. My bad.

 

[Kent]

What koeniggsegg did was absolutely 100% illegal.

This guy didn't ask for his money back from koeni, rather, he allowed them to sell the car for him. When they sold the car and got money, they gave this man stock instead of the cold-cash that was agreed upon.

When you sell any product for an owner you are legally bound to return the proceeds to the legal owner.

Koeniggsegg didn't legally own the car. They were selling the car on consignment (more or less) and the owner of the car was to be paid according to the pre-re-sale agreement.

Just think of it like this... You bought a guitar from the music store. You quit playing the guitar and want to play the trumpet.
When you go to the original store you bought the guitar from they say "we can sell it for you."
You accept the offer only to find out that when you come to collect the money earned from the sale of your guitar the shop tells you "you can't have any of the money but we will give you an equal value of stock in the company."
It's just plain wrong.

Sounds to me like Koeniggsegg couldn't afford to lose a customer and they found a highly unethical and illegal way to get around lossing the money that was put into their company.

What's so sad about that is this... They had already recieved payment for the car if the man owned it. That means they were paid once for the car and then when the man let them sell his car (presumably because they could reach out to more prospective customers) they took a second profit off the car.

Basically, by giving the man stock in their company instead of money they were able to take the profit of the second sale of the vehicle although they had no grounds to do so.

Yes the man is a chump for wrecking his car but more so, yes, koeniggsegg is criminal for stealing this man's money and attempting to force him into accepting stock he didn't buy.

 

[Philly]

Had they agreed beforehand that the man who was trying to get rid of the car was going to get reimbursed in cash? A lot of companies give store credit for returns and I wonder if stock is a little similar. Or would the fact that the car was on consignment force Koenigsegg to repay the man in cash?

Also, did Koenigsegg just keep some of the money, or all? It is perfectly normal for companies to keep a good 20% of consigned sales. If that is the issue, things would make more sense. I can't belive Koenigsegg would pretty much steal a car like that.

 

[Dave A]

Well so far we've only heared one side of the case, that is of the man suing. But if his story is accurate then he has every right to sue them. Ofcourse, I don't want to see Koenigsegg go down, they make fantastic cars, but at the end of the day the guy is well within his rights. Provided he's telling the full truth that is.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

i like how they have went from spinning the car of a track to crashing it and they made it look like he offered the car to Koenigsegg to sell it when he was told to sell the car back to Koenigsegg when he made a 10,000usd bet to street race someone....

fiver says the next wrecked veyron we see is his.

 

[Gonz013]

You're not understanding. He's not sueing because he crashed the car. He's sueing because they didn't give him the money for the sale.

It's like you asking me to sell your car, then me pocketing the money, and trying to give you some sort of other payment.

I got it the first time, read what I said more carefully. Or maybe the way I wrote it was unclear?

If Koenigsegg agreed to sell the car on consignment, it was doing the guy a favour/ providing a service. There must have been a clear agreement?
We still only seem to have one side of the story.

I find it hard to believe that Koenigsegg would suddenly turn around and offer shares rather than money, if cash payment was originally agreed on.
Like others have said, if this is the case, its clearly illegal and unethical behaviour.

It seems more likely that Koenegsigg and the owner would have agreed on shares as payment, (surely there was some paperwork done?) and only later the owner has changed his mind and wants money instead. Perhaps he did not read the consignment contract?

I also find it hard to believe that Koenegsigg would go bankkrupt for the amount that it sells one of its cars for.

If Koenegsigg is really in danger of going bankrupt, the buyer must be suing for a lot more than the cost of the car??

 

[McLaren]

This is just so Predictable!!
There are to many people capable of getting there a** in the seat of something like that, thast really powerful or what not. But they dont even know the first thing about how to drive there Grandma's Rolla!!! Damn these fools are so stupid, oh and Konisegg need to open there eyes, these dudes that can get there hands on cars like that are almost always going to be little ****s. So thats why they need a really strong purchase agreement etc. If you crash the car, your fault buddy!!! If you want us to buy it back??? WHAT BUY IT BACK!!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!! WHAT WHERE THEY THINKING!!! Could not one dude see in that bussiness, that doing something like that would be a real trouble maker.
There both as stupid as each other, the court case would be nothing less than entertaining lol

You didn't read it, did you?


The man did nothing wrong. He's sueing because they kept his money.
Read Exige's example.

You ask someone to sell your house for you, and give you the money when he does. Realtor sells house and then decides to pocket the cash and give you some other form of payment. Are you going to say yes, or ask that your money be given to you?

This is the same scenario, but with a car.

@Gonz: Now that I read it again, it's much clearer. My apologies for before.

 

[Alex.]

fiver says the next wrecked veyron we see is his.

I'll raise your fiver, with my piggy bank:




I very much agree with holden on that one 👍

not a fan of tommy sharif at all. he didnt even deserve to have the damn car.​

 

[inferno]

Uh, not to rain on anybodies parade but:

Yes i agree that what Koneeg..segg..enhymer, blah, did was wrong, but they are offering the guy stock in an amout equal to the re-sale price of the car. If he wants cash, why cant he just, uh, sell the stock? 💡

Of corse you could then argue that he would loose a portion of the compensation in the form of commission to a stock broker for the sale if he couldn't/didnt feel like selling it himself, or didnt already have one on retainer.

Either way, they should have just given him his money.

 

[Eric.]

I don't believe we have the full story. While somebody like Microsoft could get away with something like this, I don't see a small niche hypercar manufacturer being able to even think about getting out of it, let alone paying the fines or whatever.