You are making the argument that Ford's attorneys would make: we couldn't build out all orders from our dealers due to supply chain shortages beyond our control so we did the best we could and your contract was with the dealer and only the dealer has legal recourse against Ford (and no dealership in their mind would sue the hand that feeds them).
However, the plaintiff argument would be that Ford pierced the separation when they emailed you an order confirmation. They basically entered into a contract to sell you a 2022, which they breached, and there's nothing stopping them from honoring that agreement when parts becomes available, they have a legal obligation to fulfill contracts even if it means they do so less profitably (but still making money), and a model year does not grant a contract expiration.
There is no other example in a retail or distribution environment where a company promises to make a product specifically for a consumer that they then sell to someone to sell to the end customer. With appliances, furniture, computers, smartphones, fitness equipment, etc you can order from the manufacturer, order from a retailer, or buy off the shelf, but never would you build your refrigerator and order it from Home Depot yet Whirlpool sends you an order confirmation and then decides they can't build your refrigerator because they can crank out other models more profitably even though they order later and then they cancel your order because they're getting ready to build next year's orders despite it basically being the same refrigerator.
I'm definitely not on Ford's side of this argument, they failed miserably on many levels. The only question is if there is any real legal recourse or remedy for the retail customer.
I see several significant hurdles to prove this through Contract Law (disclaimer, this in not a legal opinion).
The first is the long standing business arrangment where the manufacture does NOT sell direct, but through an independant business (dealership). The purchaser's agreement is with the dealer, not the manufacture. IF there was agreement between the purchaser and manufacturer (Ford) where is the contract?
Second, just because Ford sent you an email "update" informing you about the status of your Van's build, that in no way establishes contract or agreement between the manufacturer and the purchaser, its simply an update. Assuming this would constitute a legal contract is beyond a long stretch.
If you believe that the largest automotive liabilty law firm in the country gives any concern to such a legal pursuit I'd say your mistaken. I've worked with them on previous litigation (VW Dieselgate). Take a look at their web site, you'll notice that there is one word repeated "Billions" in settlements. Why? because these are cases with massive numbers of plaintiffs, not a few hundred (if that) in this scenario with the balanced out 2022 Transit's. They want the big game and big money with slam dunk evidence. Not seeing either here.
Best bet: work with Ford to get a private offer or buy a Sprinter. Life is short, legal settlements are long-winded. If you want vindication, get the private offer and move on with van build.
JMHO
