493 replies to this topic

[StephenSLR]

If I recall correctly, the judge also noted the sellers in this matter were entitled to pursue the former owner to whom they alleged had 'manipulated' the car.

The sellers did this but later withdrew their action for reasons which are not entirely clear, but from memory the reports at the time alluded to a lack of evidence notwithstanding the relatively low standard required in civil matters.

 

Yep I agree and I doubt the previous owner advertised the car as a GT for $18k a year prior. How many people would've pushed up the bidding price?  As can be seen in this forum, when a cheap marque Torana or just about any decent Torana hits the market we're all over it critiquing every aspect, surely a cheap GT would've raised a few eyebrows in Ford world, a cheap Fairmont would've flew under the radar.

 

As it was a cut and shut, excuse the pun, case of fraud, why weren't any criminal charges laid?  What ended up happening to the car, was it re-numbered?

 

s

[xu2308]

A shut and cut done in a safe manner (To Australian Safe Standards) by law is the same car, so was it a shut and cut ????, my guess it was the inner guard tower was changed or welded in etc and the car (Falcon) did not have a shut and cut done but the tower put in that has the chassis number in it.

Edited by xu2308, 02 October 2014 - 07:03 PM.

[StephenSLR]

later X-ray examination of the firewall showed that the area around the VIN tag had been cut and welded back together. Who exactly performed the cloning work remains undetermined

 

http://blog.hemmings...h.X1nQusrz.dpuf

 

s

Edited by StephenSLR, 02 October 2014 - 07:04 PM.

[8d11p]

TB

a good post, just a couple of things though...

 

Regarding: "notwithstanding the relatively low standard required in civil matter".  

 

It is not really a low standard, it is that the Civil jurisdiction works on the Balance of Probability (more likely than not) whereas Criminal jurisdiction works on Beyond Reasonable Doubt. (There can still be a doubt, but only to the extent that it would not affect a reasonable person's belief, ...especially important when we are talking about taking away peoples liberty).

 

Regarding :   "....legal advice to discern what protections could be afforded to you in the advent of the car you sold turning out to be not what you thought it to be." 

 

I am guessing that you are suggesting a clause in the sale contract that the sale remains if you have honestly and sincerely sold the car in the belief it is what you state it is.    On the face of it it sounds great, but the buyer would have to agree and with the money being paid for these cars I would think they might likely not wish to sign their rights away.  And realistically, would such a clause stop litigation anyway. 

 

In a litigious world perhaps the safest way would be to leave the money in escrow to the time when Statute of Limitations is up, (Civil Law of course, as there is no such limitations in the Criminal side), but then who could afford/want to do that.

 

Quite a minefield when you think about it.

Edited by 8d11p, 02 October 2014 - 08:49 PM.

[a9x868]

a real can of worms!

[Tyre biter]

Thanks 8d11p,

Point 1: Hence the term 'relatively low standard'...

Point 2: Well aware, hence my saying '...discern what protections could be afforded...' And yes, it is rare one can sign away one's statutory rights - not unlike signing up to waiver cooling off periods, but nonetheless it pays to find out if and how civil torts might be mittigated IMO.

Point 3: Criminal statutes indeed have a statute of limitations save for some specific offence types which have had the SoL redacted. This is why offences were and often still are labelled summary, indictable, strict liability, felony, et al. More contemporaneous legislative practice is of course to award the SoL by term of imprisonment with the cut-off typically sitting around one year post offence for the majority of criminal statutex - in practical terms no different to how offences used to be labelled in many parts.

But I suspect you know this.

Perhaps a means around the minefield would be to advertise a car as say 'a Torana' and then set your price leaving it to the buyer to properly discern what it is and thereafter pay the asking price. Regardless of what it proves to be, no deception (unwittingly or otherwise) has occurred - just an idea...


Cheers, TB

Edited by Tyre biter, 02 October 2014 - 10:01 PM.

[wot179]

Dunno why you would cut the firewall to fake up a foulcan.

 

The number is in the top of the shocktower and could be dressed, sanded and restamped, or the whole shocktower could be replaced by a clever dick.

 

The tag comes off with 4 pop rivets.

[8d11p]

TB

 

thankfully there is no "Statute of Limitation" for any of the dishonesty offences listed in the  Crimes Act of Victoria (S.74).  I would suggest that it is a matter of always "looking over your shoulder" if you commit dishonest offences, at least in Victoria. 

 

But back to the thread,...... just because Chanel Nine News runs a 20 odd second story does not make the allegations either true, factual or proven.  

 

AND that needs to be remembered, especially if someone is considering publishing names on the site.

[wot179]

I doubt they will have a chance to "keep their heads down".

 

The cops will be looking at every car they have sold in the past to help build their case.

[yel327]

Nick I don't think anyone is saying those you describe can be all happy and OK to sell the cars they suspect aren't right. What is clearly stated is they aren't guilty of fraud (a criminal offence), assuming of course they weren't in on the whole thing in some way. What they may be guilty of is misrepresentation or false advertising in a civil court regardless of whether they suspect the car is dodgy or not. This amounts essentially to a monetary "fine" as such, not a jail sentence. That is what is being discussed here. In the end it is still buyer beware and in these cases seller beware. In the end the cars may end up being like a stolen and recovered car that ends back up in circulation, it still has value and anyone looking at the car to purchase it still has to be careful.

Edited by yel327, 03 October 2014 - 06:57 AM.

[StephenSLR]

In the Corvette world there's the NCRS (National Corvette Restorers Society), I'm not sure if they have a register but they will validate the authenticity of your Corvette on a scale of 1-100. Collecters can then sell their cars at a premium if it has a high score with certification from the NCRS.

 

If there was a body here issuing Certificate's of Authenticity, it would prompt collecters to get a CoA in order to capitalise on their investment.

 

s

[StephenSLR]

all i can say is the only safe car to buy now is the one with photographic history from first buyer on till day of sale,anything else you are taking pot luck on

 

Not even, What if you're the original owner, wrote off your car without alerting anyone and number jobbed it with a base model?

 

s

[WhiteA9XS]

If there was a body here issuing Certificate's of Authenticity, it would prompt collecters to get a CoA in order to capitalise on their investment.

 

 yep great idea , very similar to cams certificate of description for historic race vehicles (COD ) these days they are rated gold , silver and bronze . gold is totally unrestored ...

 

 the application for this also includes proving provinence of the vehicle which is all previous owners and its history .  

[Collo]

I can see the merits of something like that, but what happens when you own a genuine car but don't know/can't trace the history of it?

[WhiteA9XS]

I can see the merits of something like that, but what happens when you own a genuine car but don't know/can't trace the history of it?

 

 perhaps the no history but genuine car could be a silver or what ever the tiered system is . the history of a car or previous ownership known is a plus factor and is proof where did this car come from ! 

 

 there would need to be a regulated body to do this , say the a9x club for big toranas and one of the xu1 clubs for little ones .  

 

 cams have a fee of 900 dollars for there time for historic race vehicles , as there is paperwork and travel involved to inspect the car , so i think a fee would have to be charged , maybe the clubs could benefit.

 

 its  already part happening with in the clubs for there members only  but its not out there and widely known .  

 

 anyway just a thought .

Edited by WhiteA9XS, 03 October 2014 - 11:18 AM.

[StephenSLR]

I can see the merits of something like that, but what happens when you own a genuine car but don't know/can't trace the history of it?

 

I dunno if history comes into the grading, they just check engine no'.s, casting dates/no's and check the components you have in the car. It works on a points system, starting at 100 and points deducted for irregularities. I was speaking to a guy with a 58 Corvette, he had points deducted because a panel underneath the car was buffed, from factory it was painted but not buffed, his car was over-restored.

 

Some think the NCRS is a bit of a wank and criticise the judges; it can get a bit elitist too and they may nitpick some cars harder than others.

 

s

Edited by StephenSLR, 03 October 2014 - 11:55 AM.

[yel327]

None of it would work for those of us that have the cars to enjoy and purposely stay away from clubs.

[bullitA9X]

White A9Xs , you would need to find a club prepared to out the rebodies in their own club , for that to work .

Spot on tbm rebodied cars and cars passed off as something they are not in clubs are out there but very few that know will actually speak up...

[StephenSLR]

None of it would work for those of us that have the cars to enjoy and purposely stay away from clubs.

True but if you ever decide to sell and get the best price you'd want to get as much info on it as possible.  Perhaps even the next buyer may ask to get it verified before he lays down any cash, you could of course tell him to fork out for it just as they do in property auctions. In fact it could end up in your favour if it ever backfired and you were brought to court, you could claim it was up to the next buyer to do his due diligence and get it all checked out prior to purchase, this somehow works in the real estate world.  The unit I purchased was sold 'as is', I had no recourse if I later found any structural damage, etc.

 

s