by Unveiling the Problem
Buying a brand-new sports car should be a special occasion. The odometer shows only a few dozen miles, the paint is flawless, and the mechanical components have yet to experience life outside the factory. However, one buyer from Florida claims that his nearly $282,000 Porsche 911 GT3 wasn’t that new after all. Instead, he says, the car had already spent a year being taken apart and put back together by apprentice mechanics.
As reported by AutoNews, the lawsuit was filed after Porsche enthusiast Abdul Azizi purchased a 2022 Porsche 911 GT3 from the Porsche Warrington dealership in Pennsylvania for $281,940. The car’s odometer reportedly showed only 34 miles, and it was sold as new.
Azizi says dealership staff told him the car had only been used for “demonstration and marketing purposes” and to familiarize dealership staff with the model.
The Car’s True History
According to the lawsuit, the car had actually been previously sold to the Porsche Technology Apprenticeship Program, where it served as a training vehicle for technicians. This distinction is important. The complaint alleges that the GT3 may have been repeatedly disassembled and reassembled as part of the training process, which typically disqualifies a car from being sold as new.
Missing Sticker and Discovery of the Truth
Azizi reportedly asked for the car’s original Monroney sticker before finalizing the purchase but was told the car didn’t have one. Instead, he received a build sheet describing the specifications.
However, the day after the GT3 arrived at his home in Florida, he allegedly found the original Monroney sticker in the glove box, according to the lawsuit. The complaint states it was stamped in bold red letters with “PCNA CAR NOT FOR SALE.” The problems didn’t end there.
Shortly after taking delivery, the GT3 reportedly developed serious electrical issues. When Azizi took the car to a certified Porsche technician, the lawsuit claims the technician noticed signs that work had previously been done on the car consistent with its use as a training vehicle.
Repair Attempts and the Lemon Law
A second Porsche technician reportedly noticed that a part of the underbody had been removed and reinstalled incorrectly, providing further evidence the car had been taken apart prior to its sale. Despite numerous repair attempts, the lawsuit alleges the car remained unusable for most of the following year.
Since then, Azizi has filed and won a claim under the Lemon Law, but Porsche has appealed that decision, and thus he still has the car but says he cannot use it. For now, it remains to be seen what happens next. The only undeniable fact is that when buying a car, verifying just how “new” it is never hurts.
This story raises important questions about transparency in the automotive trade, especially in the premium and collector model segments. Buyers who lay out significant sums have the right to expect full disclosure of a vehicle’s history, even if it is formally considered new. The case also illustrates how internal corporate programs can intersect with the sales market, creating legal gray areas. The further development of this case may set an important precedent for defining what exactly can be classified as a “new car” from a legal standpoint.
