Is lease history not a good thing?

Maybe some leased it through Ferrari? Who knows. Get a PPI from someone reputable.

 

Leasing is just another method of financing. If it was well taken care of, I don't see the problem.

Most people buy new cars knowing they are going to sell them eventually anyway. A lease just structures when and how.

In fact, you could make a claim that the leaser would take good care of it knowing he's going to get dinged pretty badly on overages when he turns it back in if he doesn't. And, for sure, the dealer would inspect it upside and down for anything when it came back in.

So, if it checks out OK, I would not hold leasing against it.

Now.... a RENTAL, that would be a different story!

 

Probably OK but you need to check every car out lease or no. Lease history is not a good thing for any car in my opinion- doesn't mean I wouldn't buy the car, but your question was if it was a good thing. 2 identical cars in seemingly the same shape, condition, price...I'd take the formerly owned one vs lease history every time. I will say in the grand scheme of things probably not an issue if everything checks out (and I have purchased cars with lease history- one of the 911's I owned was leased by the first owner in fact)

 

As said before leasing is just another financing option. I don't think it matters one way or another. Just for cash flow I started to lease both of mine, but chose to pay for them instead. But either way I would have/did put tons of miles on, track them and thrash them around just the same. Be sure to get a PPI.

 

I've leased a few daily drivers, and my philosophy is to do the minimum maintenance specified, drive them hard, etc., because I know they're not "keepers".

I have in the past financed a few cars, and if I know I'm going to own it I tend to have a different outlook.

Just saying...

 

Basically the reasoning for my comments as well...spot on. Car could be fine, but could have been driven hard, put away wet so to speak. Not a deal killer, but not a positive thing either. Not the worst thing if PPI is good and car is clean.

 

I'm not scared of lease history, but I noticed when I sold my F car that many people mistook "lease" for "rental". Those people may not have been real buyers anyway.

 

I agree with Bullfighter on this one. Anyone who I've known to lease a car does not take care of it anywhere as well as if it's their own.. almost as if it's just a long term rental. Of course, that doesn't involve Ferraris but it's still a different mind set than owning.

 

Wow I really disagree. Comparing someone who leases a car to someone who rents is really going too far.

Most new Ferrari's are sold by the first owners in the first 3 years of ownership. If you lease one for 3 years, you know you have to turn it back in with normal wear and tear, normal mileage, and good maintenance or get killed with extra fees.

Putting a black mark on a car that is simply leased instead of traded in within 3 years is going overboard.

Have the car checked out and let the CONDITION of the car be the judge of it's value, not some theory of what an owner was thinking when he bought it.

 

Also, keep in mind that many exotic car "leases" are open-ended meaning that all it is a loan with a baloon payment at the end. Value of the car matters very much in this case as the lessee is responsible for the difference between the market vaule of the car and lease balance. I would not compare a regular BMW or MBZ lease where you drive it 3 years and hand the keys back to a Ferrari lease. This is a whole different deal. Get a PPI and if it checks out, go for it.

Good luck.

 

In most of these types of cars, it is really a buy that is structured as a lease payment which has a balloon payment at the end of the lease. Just a way to structure your payments. Some of the exotic car companies, such as Putnam do these types of loans/leases. Especially on older Ferrari's where no one else will structure a lease.

 

If I ever lease a car I will drive the damn thing like I stole it, the redline will be my idle!!!

 

And at the end of the lease you will pay out the nose.. for damage, excess mileage, dings, scratches, window cracks, used or unmatched tires... etc etc, If you owned it you will pay for those things with the car being decreased in value...why do you think that the leasing company won't charge you when "their" car has been used that way?...I haven't leased a car in over 3 years, but I take care of all of them the same...

 

Dings, dents or scratches, none, I park in handicap.

Window cracks, never had any.

Unmatched tires, I don't see why.

Over mileage isn't an issue unless you go over their limit.

I have owned many exotics as daily drivers and kept them in top condition and still do, but if was to owned one for two years then I would hit that rev limiter and those paddles like in Gran Turismo (PS3 game). My ex 328gts up to 71,000 miles and it was a 9.5 point car, the same with the Testarossa, etc. Anyone can lease a Ferrari take good care of it, but rev it many times and after three years at 5k or 10k miles the car will look showroom new. This has been done many times and that's why I run away from leased cars for sale.

 

And what would stop someone who owns the car from doing the same? Arent these cars made to be driven hard? Come on guys, this discussion is so irrelevant, what if someone financed the car? Does that make things different? Garage queens that have 1,000 miles on them after 3 years and the engine never passed 4,000 RPM are the cars to stay away from...

 

My F430 will be with me for ten plus years, no longer under warranty so I wont drive my car as I posted earlier, I treat it with care. I'm speaking from my own observations and from guys that I know who own, financed or lease their cars and those that lease do drive them way harder because they will never own the car, is a "rental" sort of thing. Man so many times I see them redlining their cars cold for the crowds, ouch!!!