Thoughts on a 440 'Cuda

[camarojoe]

Don't get me wrong, I'm as anti-rebody as anyone... but my point is that its already been done on the car in question...i think its a GREAT thing that the car is openly being described by the seller as what it is, rather than just passed off as something else, leaving some unsuspecting buyer to find the skeletons in the closet later. Are you saying he's foolish in doing this and should hide what's been done to the car in his description?

[x Baldwin Motion]

The word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the search bar above.

Suggestions for schpeil:
1. Chapel 2. shipley
3. cheaply 4. chippie
5. spiel 6. chippy
7. chill 8. chappie
9. Chile 10. chili
11. chips 12. choppily
13. ships 14. ship
15. Chaplin 16. cheapie
17. spill 18. chip
19. spile 20. choppy

[njsteve]

You're obviously not using your Official Barbra Streisand Yiddish-to-English Dictionary are you? It is prominantly listed there along with all time favorites like Fahkaktah and Meshugenah.

[njsteve]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't get me wrong, I'm as anti-rebody as anyone... but my point is that its already been done on the car in question...i think its a GREAT thing that the car is openly being described by the seller as what it is, rather than just passed off as something else, leaving some unsuspecting buyer to find the skeletons in the closet later. Are you saying he's foolish in doing this and should hide what's been done to the car in his description?

[/ QUOTE ]

The seller is stuck between the proverbial rock and a hard place. I would not buy that car with it's historical baggage. I really dont know what the seller can do at this point. I think the seller is trying to get the info out there to possibly limit his civil liability if someones thinks the car was misrepresented as an original body car. But his verbage in the auction is something of an admission in a criminal sense, even though he had no part in the body swap. It shows he has knowledge of the VIN swap. He most likely would not be facing any criminal charges but he (or anyone that buys the car) could very easily lose the car to a police seizure as contraband. And if a buyer loses the car in a seizure, then the buyer would then try to sue the seller. But since the buyer was fully aware that it was a body swap, the buyer would probably lose the lawsuit based on the fact that he bought it with full knowledge that it was swapped.

Wow, that last paragraph is beginning to sound like the famous verbal duel in "The Princess Bride" between the Dread Pirate Roberts and the Sicilian Kidnaper, over which glass of wine contained the Iocaine poison in it!

[tom406]

NJSteve's explanation of federal law as it pertains to this is very clear, thank you (again) for the explanation. I don't disagree with your reasoning.

I keep arguing this even though I'm more of a survivor appreciative guy. Why, I'm not sure. I don't even like quarter panel replacement on my cars.

Part of it is probably just rebellion again the enforcement of this stuff. Not that piecemeal cars should exist, but the fact that the enforcement of it is so arbitrary. We all know that who looks at the car, their knowledge, and mood all have great bearing on how "legal" your car is. How many pieces do I have to cut the donor car into before its legit?

My E-body example is one I use to demonstrate the conundrum of going "by the book". In my state, Washington, if you decide to replace the dashpad on your Hemi Cuda, get ready. Odds are reasonably high that the person at state patrol you talk to will be inclined to confiscate that VIN tag as soon as you drill the rivets. They'll be happy to issue you a nice WA state VIN sticker to replace it.

As for the early Mustangs, most cars that were repaired in the 60's and 70's used full inner fenders from donor cars and they just left the donor's VIN on there. God help them if the driver's door got replaced as well. The VIN is on the door tag, although it says right on it that its not an offical VIN. (Many owners think it is "THE VIN" however) Thus many older Mustangs sport somebody else's VIN in the main location.

I once saw a Tri 5 Chev that had almost 300K invested in it. Vin Tag went missing when the body got dipped. Car got finished with aftermarket Chassis, so there's not much to ID it as the original car. Thankfully, the body shop found the tag in the car's folder a year after it was done! Again, once State Patrol sees a tag removed, they often want to take it and stick their own on. But what if you ask the Feds or Patrol what to do? You might get a Barney Fife who decides to grab the car and put you through the mill. Hard to risk when you're $300K deep.

Any given street rod meet probably has 20% that don't have a usable VIN number anywhere on the car that corresponds to the title they have. That's dumb, but its true. Most of those early cars and trucks only had one number, or were originally registered by their (long gone)engine number. That one number is usually on the frame and gets obliterated when the V8 or IFS is put in. As an appraiser, my opinion to my clients is conservative, and I point out these issues as the serious liabilities they are, I do not give them short shrift.

I shouldn't confuse my emotional opinion that large sections of donor cars seem at least as legit as cars that are patchwork quilts of patch panels and putty with the cold legal realities of the federal laws. But more cars than we'd care to admit hover around this line of legal peril.

TOM
(NOT the patron saint of rebodies)

[camarojoe]

[ QUOTE ]
The seller is stuck between the proverbial rock and a hard place. I would not buy that car with it's historical baggage. I really dont know what the seller can do at this point. I think the seller is trying to get the info out there to possibly limit his civil liability if someones thinks the car was misrepresented as an original body car. But his verbage in the auction is something of an admission in a criminal sense, even though he had no part in the body swap. It shows he has knowledge of the VIN swap. He most likely would not be facing any criminal charges but he (or anyone that buys the car) could very easily lose the car to a police seizure as contraband. And if a buyer loses the car in a seizure, then the buyer would then try to sue the seller. But since the buyer was fully aware that it was a body swap, the buyer would probably lose the lawsuit based on the fact that he bought it with full knowledge that it was swapped.

Wow, that last paragraph is beginning to sound like the famous verbal duel in "The Princess Bride" between the Dread Pirate Roberts and the Sicilian Kidnaper, over which glass of wine contained the Iocaine poison in it!

[/ QUOTE ]

Lots of words there, but I'd still like to know if you believe the seller should hide the fact he knows the car is a rebody, as it seems like that's what you're implying... As someone else stated in another post, it seems like either way it's the "wrong" way... Tell it like it is and admit its a rebodied car, that's bad, but hide what it is, and sell it without full disclosure, that's bad too. So, which route should the seller take? While I wouldn't buy this or any other rebodied car, I still think its a good thing the seller isn't hiding anything or using a bunch of fancy words to hide what the car is... he's putting out there in plain english without beating around the bush, so there's no question as to what the car is or is not.

IMO, you can describe all the laws and regulations you want, but in the end you gotta be on one side of this fence or the other...disclose the facts or don't. Which one are you on? I read your post 3 times but I really don't see an answer. If you have problems with the true history of the car being stated plainly in the ad then what do you think the seller should have stated in his description? Not trying to be an as$ about it, I'm just curious what your idea is of how this car should be described, if "openly and honestly" isn't the right way.

[njsteve]

I dont give answers, I give arguments for either posiiton - that's what lawyers do.

The seller is stuck with a potentially siezable car. You wanted my opinion, that's my opinion. Whether he tells the world or not, does nothing to change the car's status, it only affects what level of liability any present owner faces from trying to pass it off to the next guy. It doesn't change the fact of the car's tainted heritage and the end-result it faces today based on that heritage.

My advice to him, as unplatable as it is, is this: Take it to the motor vehicle department/highway patrol, explain the status and try to get a state VIN issued for the car. I think that is the only antidote for the poisoned VIN status of this car.

We all know the value of one of these cars is intrinisically linked to the VIN code but this car's VIN-based value was destroyed years ago when it was rebodied.

[PeteLeathersac]

All nicely put Steve but before everyone prints off your short version of what's right/wrong in the eyes of the law, isn't it necessary in some States and Provinces to have the delegated authority present when performing your mentioned 'entirely legal' situations and/or have given written notice of what's being done and in some places even receive an Ok to do so first?.

You're right on in the way you view this particular car...this guy'd be best to apply for a state issued Vin and devalued status that goes along w/ it before the car is removed from him and it's too late..

~ Pete

[njsteve]

Having a law enforcement/DMV person present is something I haven't run into. Anyone have any info on this?

I can only imagine the bureaucracy involved of scheduling someone to be present at a body shop when you cut a dash top off a Camaro...or having to wait days or weeks til they show up, just so you can do the work. It's hard enough getting the cable TV guy to show up between 8 and 5, let alone a government official.

I would recommend that anyone doing any type of major work near any VIN-related parts, take lots of photos of the progress, before, during, and after, just to CYA in case someone later claims you rebodied the car or moved numbers around.

[ANDY M]

Steve, for the benefit of the guys who have no idea who Barbara Striesand is, (man am I getting old), "Spiel" in german means "play", and is a verb. (ie, "Play ball", play cards, etc.) A "schpiel", in Yiddish, means more like a "play" as what you would see on stage. A "big schpiel" is a long-winded explanation of something that could have been explained with a lot less detail. It can also be used as a verb, like when you're playing cards with someone who is taking forever to make up his mind.
I guess it helps being an MOT.