Question On rebody? 1973 Z-28

[beater68427]

I found a 1973 Z-28 white tan interior 4spd 3:73 car very complete running driving all numbers match original paint original hurst shifter and space saver with fill bottle, original wheels everything is there, Problem is this thing is rusty very very rusty I can get the car in the 3500.00 range I think, but the only way I would do this I think is a rebody, I know of a real clean rust free tub I can get for 800.00. Whats your opinions on this and is a 73 Z worth the effort???

[gb70]

I think so.

[TDW]

Would it be legal to do a rebody? If you are thinking about putting the VIN and trim Tag from the rusted one onto the good tub, I am pretty sure that isn't legal.

[beater68427]

[ QUOTE ]
Would it be legal to do a rebody? If you are thinking about putting the VIN and trim Tag from the rusted one onto the good tub, I am pretty sure that isn't legal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point I have never done one before and was wondering, so I guess it is legal then to buy new quarters trunk floor body floor rockers rear frame rails dash cowl roof skin then switch the vin to the taiwan panels?? Thats what this car would need, or rebody? or is it just parts now?

[MosportGreen66]

You're honestly contemplating rebodying a '73 Z28?

[resto4u]

Keep in mind the diminished value of a rebody. 20-30 percent reduced value, or about equal to the knock recieved because of a rebuilt or salvage title. Full discloser if and when sold. Roger

[njsteve]

Don't bother. It's illegal to rebody. Is it worth looking over your shoulder for the rest of your life wondering if/when you'll get sued by some future purchaser and/or charged with felonies for swapping a VIN to a new shell and removing a VIN from the donor shell?

[Salvatore]

I am sure you can find yourself a real nice 1973 Z/28 for reasonable money. Not sure why anybody would even consider all that work/money for a 73 Z/28 or even a 69 Z/28 for that matter. Way to many of them out there IMO. Even if you did all that work yourself it would have to add up to double of what that car is worth. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[beater68427]

[ QUOTE ]
I am sure you can find yourself a real nice 1973 Z/28 for reasonable money. Not sure why anybody would even consider all that work/money for a 73 Z/28 or even a 69 Z/28 for that matter. Way to many of them out there IMO. Even if you did all that work yourself it would have to add up to double of what that car is worth. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[/ QUOTE ] I probably will pass on it, it has just been on my mind the last couple days and I like the fact that all the original stuff is there, but that is all it has going for it. I did a parts cost including the shell I know of and came up with 13k in the car done but that is not my time at all. I kinda like to work for .05 an hour it seems.... I think I better pass on this project!

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't bother. It's illegal to rebody. Is it worth looking over your shoulder for the rest of your life wondering if/when you'll get sued by some future purchaser and/or charged with felonies for swapping a VIN to a new shell and removing a VIN from the donor shell?

[/ QUOTE ]


Oh boy, this is a can of worms that is CONSTANTLY heatedly discuss on mopar sites. There is a difference between what SOME people consider ETHICS vs. LAW.

Let me say that what I am posting here is the LAW and not MY personal opinion.


Here is the link to the Federal law:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/searc...11----000-.html (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/display.html?terms=Section%20511(a)%20of%20Title%2 018%20&url=/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000511----000-.html)

I have highlighted the areas that specifically show that it is not illegal in the regard we are referring to in the hobby.

(1) Subsection (a) of this section does not apply to a removal, obliteration, tampering, or alteration by a person specified in paragraph (2) of this subsection (unless such person knows that the vehicle or part involved is stolen).
(2) The persons referred to in paragraph (1) of this subsection are—
(A) a motor vehicle scrap processor or a motor vehicle demolisher who complies with applicable State law with respect to such vehicle or part;
(B) a person who repairs such vehicle or part, if the removal, obliteration, tampering, or alteration is reasonably necessary for the repair;
(C) a person who restores or replaces an identification number for such vehicle or part in accordance with applicable State law; and
(D) a person who removes, obliterates, tampers with, or alters a decal or device affixed to a motor vehicle pursuant to the Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Act, if that person is the owner of the motor vehicle, or is authorized to remove, obliterate, tamper with or alter the decal or device by— (i) the owner or his authorized agent; (ii) applicable State or local law; or
(iii) regulations promulgated by the Attorney General to implement the Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Act

it is my understanding that some States have laws against it that do not spell out exceptions for the hobby. However, any links to individual State laws that have been sent to me I HAVE found a similar exception to the Fed. law.

The bottom line is, THE INTENT of the law. It is basically spelled out in the FEDERAL law. The law was created to thwart criminals trying to hide stolen vehicles, NOT the car hobby, restorations, lost V.I.N. of legal owners.

Futhermore, when Dynacorn first started offering complete bodies for 1969 Camaros this came up. Below is a copy and paste from their FAQ section addressing this.



Question: 2005/06/29

What about the VIN?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer: 2005/06/29

A Vehicle or Vessel Identification Number (VIN) is issued by a manufacturer or State Licensing authority. There are three ways for a vehicle to obtain a number.

1) An existing VIN on a vehicle that is titled in your name can be transferred to a repair part (as instructed by your State authority).
2) A number may be issued by your State to ID a custom built vehicle when it passes a safety and number verification inspection.
3) A licensed manufacturer issued a VIN when the vehicle (or vessel) is made and ready for delivery. This can only be issued when a "turn key" (completed) car, truck, boat or aircraft has been manufactured.


Many people are not aware that this happens all the time with wreck rebuilders when two cars are grafted togather and of course only ONE V.I.N. can be used.

With Mopars since they are unibodies the REAL question is, how much of a chunk of the original unibody with the V.I.N. attached has to remain to make a difference between a conventional restoration vs. a rebody. The V.I.N. plate is attached to the door on 67 back cars and on the dash panel on 68-up cars. BOTH of these items are bolt on items, so do you simply bolt THOSE items to a donor body and call it a conventional resto? It all boils down to what the owner can live with in their own minds.

Rebodys go on in the secret of individual garages simply because even though it is legal in the eyes of the Federal law it is still frowned upon by SOME of the hobby.

[markinnaples]

Would it be worth buying it and getting a 6 cyl 70-73 and making a clone out of it?

Is it for personal use or to flip?

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am sure you can find yourself a real nice 1973 Z/28 for reasonable money. Not sure why anybody would even consider all that work/money for a 73 Z/28 or even a 69 Z/28 for that matter. Way to many of them out there IMO. Even if you did all that work yourself it would have to add up to double of what that car is worth. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[/ QUOTE ] I probably will pass on it, it has just been on my mind the last couple days and I like the fact that all the original stuff is there, but that is all it has going for it. I did a parts cost including the shell I know of and came up with 13k in the car done but that is not my time at all. I kinda like to work for .05 an hour it seems.... I think I better pass on this project!

[/ QUOTE ]


I agree that for this particular car it would not be cost effective regarding the end value of the car. the absolute BEST #1 1973 Z28 should be a top price of $30K and probably far less in this market time.

[king_midas]

Only illegal if the car that is being destroyed is stolen. If you keep the titles for both cars, and document the swap, you're good to go.

Why everyone gets their panties in an bunch over this is beyond me. It's nothing different than a motor swap...

In Cali, they look at all numbers when inspecting a car, and if your eng # doesn't match, you have to prove where it came from, as they're on the lookout for theft.

This is no different.

[William]

There were at least two re-bodied cars sold at B-J last January, disclosed on their display info.

[Salvatore]

Smart move Jeff. You can do much better! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif

[njsteve]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't bother. It's illegal to rebody. Is it worth looking over your shoulder for the rest of your life wondering if/when you'll get sued by some future purchaser and/or charged with felonies for swapping a VIN to a new shell and removing a VIN from the donor shell?

[/ QUOTE ]


Oh boy, this is a can of worms that is CONSTANTLY heatedly discuss on mopar sites. There is a difference between what SOME people consider ETHICS vs. LAW.

Let me say that what I am posting here is the LAW and not MY personal opinion.


Here is the link to the Federal law:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/searc...11----000-.html (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/display.html?terms=Section%20511(a)%20of%20Title%2 018%20&url=/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000511----000-.html)

I have highlighted the areas that specifically show that it is not illegal in the regard we are referring to in the hobby.

(1) Subsection (a) of this section does not apply to a removal, obliteration, tampering, or alteration by a person specified in paragraph (2) of this subsection (unless such person knows that the vehicle or part involved is stolen).
(2) The persons referred to in paragraph (1) of this subsection are—
(A) a motor vehicle scrap processor or a motor vehicle demolisher who complies with applicable State law with respect to such vehicle or part;
(B) a person who repairs such vehicle or part, if the removal, obliteration, tampering, or alteration is reasonably necessary for the repair;
(C) a person who restores or replaces an identification number for such vehicle or part in accordance with applicable State law; and
(D) a person who removes, obliterates, tampers with, or alters a decal or device affixed to a motor vehicle pursuant to the Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Act, if that person is the owner of the motor vehicle, or is authorized to remove, obliterate, tamper with or alter the decal or device by— (i) the owner or his authorized agent; (ii) applicable State or local law; or
(iii) regulations promulgated by the Attorney General to implement the Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Act

it is my understanding that some States have laws against it that do not spell out exceptions for the hobby. However, any links to individual State laws that have been sent to me I HAVE found a similar exception to the Fed. law.

The bottom line is, THE INTENT of the law. It is basically spelled out in the FEDERAL law. The law was created to thwart criminals trying to hide stolen vehicles, NOT the car hobby, restorations, lost V.I.N. of legal owners.

Futhermore, when Dynacorn first started offering complete bodies for 1969 Camaros this came up. Below is a copy and paste from their FAQ section addressing this.



Question: 2005/06/29

What about the VIN?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer: 2005/06/29

A Vehicle or Vessel Identification Number (VIN) is issued by a manufacturer or State Licensing authority. There are three ways for a vehicle to obtain a number.

1) An existing VIN on a vehicle that is titled in your name can be transferred to a repair part (as instructed by your State authority).
2) A number may be issued by your State to ID a custom built vehicle when it passes a safety and number verification inspection.
3) A licensed manufacturer issued a VIN when the vehicle (or vessel) is made and ready for delivery. This can only be issued when a "turn key" (completed) car, truck, boat or aircraft has been manufactured.


Many people are not aware that this happens all the time with wreck rebuilders when two cars are grafted togather and of course only ONE V.I.N. can be used.

With Mopars since they are unibodies the REAL question is, how much of a chunk of the original unibody with the V.I.N. attached has to remain to make a difference between a conventional restoration vs. a rebody. The V.I.N. plate is attached to the door on 67 back cars and on the dash panel on 68-up cars. BOTH of these items are bolt on items, so do you simply bolt THOSE items to a donor body and call it a conventional resto? It all boils down to what the owner can live with in their own minds.

Rebodys go on in the secret of individual garages simply because even though it is legal in the eyes of the Federal law it is still frowned upon by SOME of the hobby.

[/ QUOTE ]

Plain and simple. Are you a lawyer giving legal advice on this subject? If you are not, please don't do it. Your interpretation is incorrect. You never go by only the letter of the law, you follow the caselaw interpretations of the statutory language.

I am an attorney. I have experience with this area of law. Everyone always seems to forget the fact that it takes 2 cars to do a rebody.

WHEN YOU REMOVE THE VIN OFF OF THE DONOR CAR, THAT IS A SEPERATE FELONY. WHEN YOU PLACE A VIN TAG ON A CAR BODY OTHER THAN THE BODY IT CAME FROM THE FACTORY ON, THAT IS A FELONY. You could conceivably be charged with five seperate felonies for doing a rebody: the removal from the original body, the failure to replace it on that body, the removal from the donor body, the failure to replace it on that body, and the placement of the original VIN on the donor body.

No state exemption allows you to do this. It refers to repairing component parts, i.e., a rusted dash panel, by removing the VIN, repairing/replacing the panel and reattaching it TO THE SAME BODY, NOT A DIFFERENT ONE.

Sorry for getting on my high horse but if it saves someone the grief and massive legal expenses of defending criminal charges as well as a the enevitable civil lawsuit, I am happy to provide the advice.

One more thing to worry about is the statute of limitations: while the criminal charge may have a specific time limit on how long charges can be filed from the moment of the original rebodying, (3-5 years) most states have antifraud laws that start the clock running from the time the fraud WAS OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISCOVERED, not from when it actually occurred, i.e., not the date of the rebody but the date when the 4th or 5th guy down the line finally discovers his low mile Z/28 is neither a Z/28 nor has low miles. So that in and of itself should make people think twice about rebodying when you could get sued many, many years later.

As for the sellers of cars at BJ and other auctions that openly advertise the fact that their cars were rebodied, I would say "There but for the grace of God..." I don't doubt that one of these days there's going to be an interesting scene at one of these auctions, when some major law enforcement action occurs. But for the time being, the Feds have more important bad guys to chase after.

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
There were at least two re-bodied cars sold at B-J last January, disclosed on their display info.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it is as big a deal throughout the hobby as it seems to be on these Internet forums based on what I see at some of the auctions where full disclosure has been made. basicly the people buying think if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the V.I.N. of a duck it is a duck.

Yes, a few years ago there was a 1970 Hemi Cuda hardtop at B-J that had burned in a warehouse fire and was rebodied. They disclosed it on the auction block ON SpeedVision and it sold for $600K pluse buyers fee. that was more than any other Cuda hardtop during that sale including the 71s.

[njsteve]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There were at least two re-bodied cars sold at B-J last January, disclosed on their display info.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it is as big a deal throughout the hobby as it seems to be on these Internet forums based on what I see at some of the auctions where full disclosure has been made. basicly the people buying think if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the V.I.N. of a duck it is a duck.

Yes, a few years ago there was a 1970 Hemi Cuda hardtop at B-J that had burned in a warehouse fire and was rebodied. They disclosed it on the auction block ON SpeedVision and it sold for $600K pluse buyers fee. that was more than any other Cuda hardtop during that sale including the 71s.

[/ QUOTE ]

I remember watching that auction, too. I was sitting around with a couple of buddies who investigate that particular crime and I saw their eyes bug out as they both looked at each other in disbelief at what they just heard from the announcers. They then had a race to see who could call the car in first and file the report. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There were at least two re-bodied cars sold at B-J last January, disclosed on their display info.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it is as big a deal throughout the hobby as it seems to be on these Internet forums based on what I see at some of the auctions where full disclosure has been made. basicly the people buying think if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the V.I.N. of a duck it is a duck.

Yes, a few years ago there was a 1970 Hemi Cuda hardtop at B-J that had burned in a warehouse fire and was rebodied. They disclosed it on the auction block ON SpeedVision and it sold for $600K pluse buyers fee. that was more than any other Cuda hardtop during that sale including the 71s.

[/ QUOTE ]

I remember watching that auction, too. I was sitting around with a couple of buddies who investigate that particular crime and I saw their eyes bug out as they both looked at each other in disbelief at what they just heard from the announcers. They then had a race to see who could call the car in first and file the report. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I know an AZ. ex state trooper that used to investigate stolen cars as well that thought something should be done about that situation as well, but the bottom line is, that unless there is a stolen car or parts involved, there is nothing illegal about it.

Most people don't like to think about it but how many of our cars out there do you think may have stolen parts on them? When you buy parts for your car do you investigate where they came from? If you are buying a part that has a V.I.N. on it do you call the police to see if that V.I.N. was ever reported stolen? Food for thought. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

[njsteve]

[ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I know an AZ. ex state trooper that used to investigate stolen cars as well that thought something should be done about that situation as well, but the bottom line is, that unless there is a stolen car or parts involved, there is nothing illegal about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is still very much illegal, it is just not that often enforced if the car wasn't found to be stolen, as they have much more bigger fish to fry.

A lot of retired law enforcement car guys work for NICB (National Insurance Crime Bureau). One thing I forgot to mention is that when those rebodied cars show up at auction, the NICB guys get the VIN number info and plug them into their database. Imagine your surprise when you buy that rebodied $600K hemicuda and try to insure it and your insurance company declines coverage, and then every other insurance company you call after that also declines coverage as the car has been redflagged as a rebody in the insurance crime database. OUCH!

[Smokey]

Wow...and just think what happens in the street rod world!!! The feds could take 85% of the cars at the Street Rod Nats if they wanted to be pricks and do a sting.

[njsteve]

Don't the home-made street rods usually get some type of state-issued VIN plate for registration purposes?

[Bill Pritchard]

Since it appears you've decided against the project that's the original subject of this thread, this is probably a moot point, but I'll throw it out there anyway....

A 73 Z28 would not thave had a Hurst shifter or a space saver spare tire as original equipment, so the car may not be quite as original as you thought.

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I know an AZ. ex state trooper that used to investigate stolen cars as well that thought something should be done about that situation as well, but the bottom line is, that unless there is a stolen car or parts involved, there is nothing illegal about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is still very much illegal, it is just not that often enforced if the car wasn't found to be stolen, as they have much more bigger fish to fry.

A lot of retired law enforcement car guys work for NICB (National Insurance Crime Bureau). One thing I forgot to mention is that when those rebodied cars show up at auction, the NICB guys get the VIN number info and plug them into their database. Imagine your surprise when you buy that rebodied $600K hemicuda and try to insure it and your insurance company declines coverage, and then every other insurance company you call after that also declines coverage as the car has been redflagged as a rebody in the insurance crime database. OUCH!

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't believe that.

Did you read my post on page one of this thread? The Federal law is quite clear on this. Now if the V.I.N. showed up as an earlier reported STOLEN car, it would be a different story and the car would be confiscated as stolen property. An insurance company has no legal right to refuse insurance on a rebodied car. The insurance companies SELL totaled cars to wreck rebuilders all the time who graft two totaled cars togather and use ONE V.I.N. as has been going on for decades.

Think about this. In 1971 you had a 1969 Chevelle that was in a front end collision. The adjuster allowed for a used front clip. Fast foward 1 year. This same car is hit in the rear. The adjuster allows for a used rear clip. now you have a car made up from TWO different cars for the original THIRD car in this senerio that is using the V.I.N. from the original car. Do you think they are denying insurance coverage for this car then or NOW?

[njsteve]

Your example is perfectly legal as a repair, provided the VIN has not been removed from the original car (in the center).

NICB maintains records on people, driving records, motor vehicles, any past claims on them, especially fraudulent activity, etc. Anything that would affect the rights/remedies of an insurance company is added to the database and cross referenced by the VIN or biographical information. In other words, you can bet an insurance company would be interested if they are insuring a car for $600k that is worth only $150K due to VIN tampering/rebodying.

Did you read my response to your earlier post? I guess not. You have no actual experience with Federal law. I do. You can either believe what I tell you from my experience or not. I don't really care.

It's people who don't follow legal advice, that I make my living, dealing with.

I'm done. Anything more and I bill for my hours.

[RichSchmidt]

Dont call it a rebody,and dont disclose it,if you want to do it,then do it right.Cut the right tulip(firewall extention)out of both cars,remove the last section of the firewall to the far right on both cars{the part that has the hidden VIN} by carefully drilling out every spot weld,and weld that section from the Z into the donor car,swap the tags,and forget it.Most of what is out there now is majority jap sheet metal with factory firewalls anyhow,so a rebody using a real GM body is more authentic then fixing the original since it will be correct warts and all.If neither car is stolen,you have nothing to loose sleep over.You should use as many parts of the original Z as possible including the front subframe if you are using a different year donor car sinc the 73 had different holes in the subframe and radiator support to mount the improved bumper hardware for the 73.There are also numbers Identifying the model on car in the floorpan over the rear support plate for the driveshaft tunnel,you might want to correct those numbers too.Remeber also that you shouldnt use a 1970 body for this rebody since the floorpan over the rear axle is slightly different.Go ahead and flame away,but his car will be more correct and of higher standards then most of the "restored" cars out there,and it will cost him half as much.

[beater68427]

[ QUOTE ]
Since it appears you've decided against the project that's the original subject of this thread, this is probably a moot point, but I'll throw it out there anyway....

A 73 Z28 would not thave had a Hurst shifter or a space saver spare tire as original equipment, so the car may not be quite as original as you thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

1973 Camaro N65 Spare space saver unit cost $14.16 units sold 1314 http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/burnout.gif

[king_midas]

Had a post, felt bad about it, and deleted...

None of this really matters. Especially for a 36 y/o car that isn't really that special.

If the guy wants the car and wants to take all of the parts from one and bolt them onto the other one, just do it and keep records. If you have nothing to hide, there's nothing to worry about.

Take care gents.

[resto4u]

There are cars out there with only original firewall pieces, copo camaro, yenko duece, ZL-1, yenko camaro, and on and on. Right or wrong, the guy can do what he wants.

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
Your example is perfectly legal as a repair, provided the VIN has not been removed from the original car (in the center).

NICB maintains records on people, driving records, motor vehicles, any past claims on them, especially fraudulent activity, etc. Anything that would affect the rights/remedies of an insurance company is added to the database and cross referenced by the VIN or biographical information. In other words, you can bet an insurance company would be interested if they are insuring a car for $600k that is worth only $150K due to VIN tampering/rebodying.
Did you read my response to your earlier post? I guess not. You have no actual experience with Federal law. I do. You can either believe what I tell you from my experience or not. I don't really care.

It's people who don't follow legal advice, that I make my living, dealing with.

I'm done. Anything more and I bill for my hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im response to all of this:

1. If you look at the areas of my post on page one that are bolded it clearly shows an allowance for removal and MOVING a V.I.N.

2. The B-J $600K rebody sale example shows that the bidders apparently didn't CARE that the car was rebodied and therefore by its sale proves that. Price guides for these old cars that lenders and insurance companies use for determining value are compiled from auction results and reporting old car dealers. The value of THIS car creates it's own comparible with it's sale at auction WITH full disclosure. There were multiple buyers (obviously) involved in the sales since it was an auction.

The whole point of this example is to show that the price of the car was NOT effected by the fact that it was a rebody. The car burned in a fore. The owner salvaged what they could. They bought another donor body and made one car of the remains of two. The same way that wreck rebuilders do from cars they purchase from insurance company sales.

3. Did you read the copy and paste from the Dynacorn FAQ section of their web site regarding the use of an existing V.I.N. plate for their replacement bodies? Do you think that maybe they had some pretty good legal advise on this issue?

4. Yes, I read yours and all others in this thread word for word. You don't know me or what my experience is so let me tell you. I spent 30 years in the auto business. I have seen every type of title senario there is. It was one of my jobs to watch for cars being traded that had problems e.g. stolen cars, V.I.N. tampering, etc. I was involved in the leader ads that were run in print, radio, and TV. I have had MANY conversations with the State's attorney general about what is legal and what is not. I personally had a 1966 Corvette that was stolen and recovered that the V.I.N. tag was removed and destroyed by the theives during the time it was missing. I was able to LEGALLY have an accurate reproduction V.I.N. plate made and re-installed on the car. So, I am familiar with these matters from a very professional, personal, and legal standpoint.

4. I know as an attorney it is your nature and job to argue your point, look for ways to twist and portray the law to the out come you are looking for. An attorney's OPNINON is just that, and the same for an opposing attorney on the other side of a case. I guess you can consider ME the other attorney in this case. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif It is a JUDGE'S job to listen to both sides and review the existing law and case law of other cases and make a decision based on the facts. It is pretty easy to see that the V.I.N. tampering law was created to thwart auto theives and chop shops and not effect restorers, repairers, and wreck rebuilders. The Federal law makers apparently thought enough about these law abidding citizens to write the exceptions to the law as spelled out on my post on page one to protect those people.

5. Maybe I should be the one sending a bill for legal advise. Oh, wait, that would be illegal for praticing law without a license. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif

Seriously, as I stated at the top of my opening post, I am not trying to influence you or anyone else with this information, but rather inform people as to what the law says. It is very clear to me that the INTENT of the law was to thwart CRIMINALS not the old car hobby. When it is all said and done the vlaues of these rebodied cars will seek their own value. The B-J Cuda example is just that, an example to the hobby of how some buyers don't consider it a problem. I have a long post saved regarding the perpetual rebody/restoration arguement that shows both sides of it, if you or anyone else is interested I can post it here.

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't the home-made street rods usually get some type of state-issued VIN plate for registration purposes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Some do some don't. It usually depends on wheather or not there is a legal valid title for the car that was modified.

Lets use as an example a 32 Ford streetrod. Regarless of the updated engine, suspension, wheels, instruments, A/C, or any other upgrades to the car the owner made, it is STILL a 32 Ford. If legal title hasn't been lost over the last 77 years then it is still used to title and license the car. If it has been lost then the guy has to deal with the State he is trying to register it in. Typically the State DMV inspector is going to try and determine what the car started life as, try to find and original V.I.N. for the car, check to see if it was ever reported stolen, look for V.I.N.s of any parts attached, check to see if they are reported stolen, etc. THEN, regardless of weather it has a FACTORY V.I.N. plate or not they MAY create a State issued V.I.N. plate and attach it and create a control number with a file of their actions that will follow the car for the rest of it's life. In this example of a lost title, it is the discretion of the inspector regarding a State issued V.I.N. tag. However, MOST people are aware that titles for older cars are easy to get and do so BEFORE the show up at a DMV office and don't have to deal with this. The thing that you ALWAYS want to do when you are considering buying a car without a title is to call law enforcement with the V.I.N. and tell them you are considering buying the car and ask them to check and see if it has ever been reported stolen BEFORE you buy it.

Back to the street rod senario. A street rod is typically NOT considered "home made." As stated above, they begin life and are still considered by the law and DMV as what the were born regardless of the modification made to them.

V.I.N. plates for "home made" licensible items are things such as trailers. Some home built motorized vehicles such as kit cars, motorcycles, and cars built from scratch can also fall into this catagory, but it has become much harder to comply to federal and state laws to make this cost effective for most people.

[Xplantdad]

On the other hand...then there is this...

http://www.hemmings.com/mus/stories/2006/07/01/hmn_feature16.html

[SuperNovaSS]

Steve, This has been gone over so many times on this site. You should just save the time and start copy and pasting your old responses.


Jason

[gb70]

Good article Bruce.

Remember that Camaro the was waisted that sold on Ebay recently. One question to the seller was would he sell the Vin and cowl plate. People should really think about the consequences of law first before selfish greed. The Hemmings article you shared made me realize that auction. Hope the new buyer does not try to resell it on another body.

[Fast67VelleN2O]

In my personal opinion, I don't care if a car has been rebodied or not. The only people who do care, are the people trying to preserve the value of their non rebodied valuable muscle cars. They are the only ones who speak out against this practice. I usually just ignore them. If you were talking about reboding a rusty 6 cylinder base car to another 6 cylinder base car body, no one would care. Every single body on the assembly line started off the same, they just received different options and numbers. There is NO difference between a rebody and someone who replaces fenders, doors, quarters, trunk and floor pans, body braces, rockers, and a roof skin on a rusty car. Techinally, every single car out there, when on the assembly line, started off as a BASE zero option car. Further down the assembly line, every car was given their unique traits. All that a rebody is doing, is replacing one cars unique traits to another. As long as you disclose that the car is a rebody, who cares.

-Matt

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand...then there is this...

http://www.hemmings.com/mus/stories/2006/07/01/hmn_feature16.html

[/ QUOTE ]

I am aware of this and this is EXACTLY what the law was written to guard against. This was a blantant attempt at fraud. The seller created a DIFFERENT V.I.N. tag, changing it from what it originally was by changing the engine identification character.

This is COMPLETELY different from what I am posting about here which is the EXCEPTION to the V.I.N. tampering law that allows for repair, replacement, and restoration regarding the moving of a V.I.N. tag.

Understand also that as I stated in my original post on this subject, that State laws vary. In some states the Federal law may not apply.

[MultiMopars]

SuperNovaSS

That is what I do in many cases as there are other arguments that are ongoing in our hobby that people have VASTLY different opinions on.
Values of original engines, date coded engines, and restamping of engines is onE example. I, as other have a lot to say about these things.




Fast67VelleN2O

I agree completely!




Let me throw some more gas on the fire. You guys can read this and continue to argue both sides of this arguement until the end of time. bare in mind this was written in the Mopar community which are unibodies so some of it will sound funny to guys that deal in frame and body cars.

This subject typically comes up about once a week SOMEWHERE in the hobby.

I will do my best to present all I know to be the OPINIONS and FACTS of BOTH sides of this controvery, so that in the future anyone interested in the subject can save this and argue with themselves over this.

Here we go.

FOR THE PEOPLE THAT BELIEVE REBODYING IS WRONG

Many people in the hobby feel that there is a big difference in the way people "restore" a car, ESPECIALLY a unibody.

They believe that the unibody is the core or soul of the car.

They believe that when the car was created by the manufacturer, that the numbers that were assigned to that particular unibody, and the assortment of parts that were assigned to and installed on it to create the model they were disignating are sacred. That no one else outside of the manufacturer has the right to do a V.I.N. switch (which did happen when these cars were new before they ever left the final assembly line) on any of these cars for any reason.

They believe that IF the car is what they consider to be salvagable by repairing existing body parts or installing new, reproduction, or good used parts, that is the only legal/ethical way to restore the car and maintain the heritage/originality of the car that the original manufacturer built.

They feel that when a car is rusted/damaged to the point that there is little left of the original unibody that the car should be scrapped and taken out of existence.

They believe this is not just a matter of legalities but also a matter of ethics.

They believe that even if it IS legal on a Federal level and in many States, that it is still unethical and morally wrong.

They feel that restoration by rebody is NOT a restoration at all but rather a fraud created on the hobby and any line of ownership after the rebody takes place.

They feel that even when disclosure is made by the party that did the rebody, to the next person that purchases the car, that it is still unacceptable. They feel that it is all to likely that somewhere down the line in years to come with the ownership changes of the car that this will NOT be disclosed to future buyers.

Many are adamant about their belief that switching V.I.N. tags to another similar car/unibody and associated hidden I.D. numbers is just plain wrong, legal or not. Regardless of how CORRECT the car may appear, with all of the correct componants that the factory would have installed on a like unibody, it is not the same as when the factory did it, and that THEY (the original manufacturer) are the only ones that had the right to do so.

They consider all rebodies to be nothing more than a clone with the identity numbers from another car.

They believe that a registry of any KNOWN rebodies and any SUSPECTED rebodied should be kept for any future buyers to be aware of to aid in their buying decision.

Before we go to the other side of the arguement, the below information needs to be considered.



THE CATCH 22

Most feel the real problem is that there is no definition of where the line is with regards to the restoration of a unibody car.

At what point does the car cross the line from what has been described above as a restoration rather than a rebody?

How much of the original unibody has to be left for new, reproduction, or good used parts to be attached to?

How big of a CHUNK of a donor car can you use in this restoration before it is considered a rebody?

Does the simple act of removing the V.I.N. plate from one car or part of the car constitute a rebody?

What about removing the V.I.N. plate because the part of the car that it is attached to is damaged? Does this constitute a rebody?

Does a car that was front or rear "clipped" by a bodyshop 30+ years ago constitute a partial rebody?

If a car was first FRONT clipped and a year later REAR clipped, does this constitute a complete rebody?

All good questions with no answers that probably any two people will agree on.

This is why so many people have mixed feeling about the restoration/rebody arguement.



FOR THE PEOPLE THAT BELIEVE THAT A REBODY IS AN ACCEPTABLE FORM OF RESTORATION

These people do not believe the car or unibody has a soul, or that the car is sacred. They do not hold the manufacturer in a Godly manner and assume that none of the factory line workers were any kind of Saints.

They believe that the base unibody is the same for a given car line (e.g. "A", "B", "C", or "E" body) and it is just an assembly of parts added to this base unibody that creates the particular price class. These are terms that Chrysler created for their cars.

These people believe that IF the manufacturer had the right to switch V.I.N.s of a car that they built, that an individual has the same right, provided that they legally own both cars involved in the rebody.

The manufacturer did this in the interest of "saving" a car, rather than scrapping it, for purely financial reasons. If they mistakenly built a car that somehow did not meet the criteria of what the V.I.N. model designation indicated, they took the path of least cost to convert it to a different model and made a V.I.N. plate switch that reflected that. Did you ever wonder why the HIDDEN V.I.N. numbers don't have the FULL V.I.N. stamped in them? It left flexability for the manufacturer to make V.I.N./model changes when the car was near completion.

The people that believe in rebodying, do so for the same reason, because it is financially less costly.

These people also sometimes do so in the interest of safety when they have a car that they want to save that may have serious body deformation or serious rust problems in the unibody.

These people believe that they are also saving the heritage of the car by doing so.

These people feel that it is better to have a donor car that is as the factory built, and without damage, to transplant the parts that were factory installed specific parts that made up the identity of the car they want to save.

They believe that it is legal on a Federal level and cite the Federal Law from the Cornell University Law Library in the link below as their proof.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I.html


These people argue that in a State that considers rebodying a car is illegal, don't think that State law would hold up against an appeal to a higher court.

OPINION: They believe it would be pretty obvious that if a State court ruled it illegal when the person that did it OWNED both cars legally, the defending party would arguing "intent," indicating that if the State law was upheld in this case, that it would be appealed to a Federal court. With this information in front of a judge (who is certainly smart enough to understand the "intent" of the law was to thwart chop shops) would rule in favor of the person who did the rebody. It would certainly be overturned in a Federal court. Not to mention, it would have to PROVEN that the rebody was DONE in the a State that it was against State law, and have an eye witness that actually saw the numbers switch take place in order to "prove" that the seller actually did it. It probably would not even get to trial and would be thrown out at the initial hearing. Court systems are overloaded throughout the US with trials that are far more important that someone doing a restoration (rebody) of a car that involves a donor car that the parts could have been switched in either direction. The whole thing is way too subjective with regards to where the line is, as indicated in the CATCH 22 section above.

They believe what you are talking about here would be a criminal suite, not a civil action. Anybody can sue someone and get a trail for a civil suite, but it is a whole other story when you are talking a criminal action.

These people believe that the people on the other side of this controversial subject, do their best to impact the value of a rebodied car in a derrogatory manner. This leads to it NOT being disclosed in most cases and will continue to be the case until such time that these cars are not looked down upon by some, but not all, in the hobby.



MY PERSONAL OPINION

In closing, rebodying has been going on in the entire hobby not just the Mopar world since the 1930s. It is not going away, especially with prices on the continual rise for the cars it is being done with. If people want to really DO something about it, they should be trying to formulate a definition that will be accepted THROUGHOUT the hobby, of at what point a restoration becomes a rebody as indicated in the above catch 22 section of this post. This will give these two sides an entirely different thing to argue about rather than the legal/ethical issues that have been never ending.

[MultiMopars]

BTW, I own a 1978 Dodge little Red Express Truck. They never made one from the factory in 4X4. I wanted one, so I made one. The only acceptable way to do it was to buy a 4X4 donor truck that ended up being a 1977 shortbed for the chassis and 4X4 componants. I had the body, engine, trans from the 1978 truck mounted on the 1977 chassis along with the 1977 front differential, trans tail shaft, and rear end. The V.I.N. for the truck is mounted on the door and of course there was no title or V.I.N. alterations.

Do I have a rebody? Of course in the truest sence as the body was completely switched to another chassis. I still have the original 2X4 chassis by the way. Hows this for total disclosure? Anybody that knows anything about these trucks knows they never built one like this so it is no big secret in the first place.

So call the police, I could care less and they won't either as I legally own BOTH vehicles.

Here is a photo album link of the truck for anyone interested.

http://s283.photobucket.com/albums/kk298/696pack/1978%20Lil%20Red%20Express%20Truck/

[MosportGreen66]

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand...then there is this...

http://www.hemmings.com/mus/stories/2006/07/01/hmn_feature16.html

[/ QUOTE ]

Well done Bruce! I was waiting for it.

-Dan

[njsteve]

[ QUOTE ]


Im response to all of this:

1. If you look at the areas of my post on page one that are bolded it clearly shows an allowance for removal and MOVING a V.I.N.


[/ QUOTE ]


You seem to be basing your opinion completely on the above statement.

You are incorrectly interpreting the statute. No where in the Federal Statutes that you cite does it say that MOVING the VIN to another body is a legally permissible exception. I have yet to find a State statute that specifically permits it either. Have you?

The Federal statututory exception addresses removing the VIN during a repair, to affect that repair and then refers to replacing it on THE SAME vehicle during that repair process. It never mentions MOVING it somewhere else.

You have some very intelligently stated opinions, but as even you said, that is all they are, opinions.

As a restorer, I would rather err on the side of not facing the possibility of civil lawsuits or criminal penalties than err on the side of looking over my shoulder for the cops (less likely) or some disgruntled purchaser with a flock of lawyers for the next 10 years (far more likely).

If you really want to have a rebody exception to the Federal stautes, someone has to put that into a bill form and run it through their senator or congressman. I hereby nominate you to do that. That would settle the argument once and for all and I could finally put down my keyboard and mouse forever.

[njsteve]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand...then there is this...

http://www.hemmings.com/mus/stories/2006/07/01/hmn_feature16.html

[/ QUOTE ]

Well done Bruce! I was waiting for it.

-Dan

[/ QUOTE ]

By the way, they found out that VIN had a different engine code digit through NICB. NICB has microfiche records of most vehicle shipments from the assembly plants back in the day. All they have to do is run that exact VIN and if it comes back as a partial match other than the engine code, the big red flag goes up (like in the case of that hemicuda).

[x Baldwin Motion]

[ QUOTE ]
......... it clearly shows an allowance for removal and MOVING a V.I.N.


[/ QUOTE ]


and the allowance is.....
"maximum penalties of 42 years in prison"


http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gifOk, time for my warm milk and a nice cozy bed. And nobody named bubba wanting to rub my feet!! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[67BelAir427]

Steve, I appreciate your excellent explanation of the law relating to rebodied cars. I think a permanent thread with your comments would be great. Every time the topic comes up I am amazed at the number of people who mistakenly think the practice is acceptable, legal, and ethical. Marc

[beater68427]

I really did not want this to get to a personal issue, I usually like looking for rust free cars and on this venture I found the other end of the story a very original untouched car but rusty as all could be, I have never built a rebodied car but I feel this car would be the only way, I was curious on opinion, and well.. got more than needed... I have my own opinions as well, as to U.S. welded Taiwan bodies and U.S. marketed import parts but will keep them to myself... scamers will be scamers and due diligence when buying... http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/flag.gif

[njsteve]

Sorry that 73 Z didn't work out for you.

Heck, I wish there was a law against people leaving these cars out to rust away to nothing and refusing to sell them to someone who could save them before it was too late. I think we all have a guy or two near us who has one of those cars melting away in the side yard.

We could call it The Felonious Abandonement of Restorable Treasures (FART) Act. Punishable by the forfeiture of the car to the nearest enthusiast with a demonstratable ability to restore the car back to its original condition. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Im response to all of this:

1. If you look at the areas of my post on page one that are bolded it clearly shows an allowance for removal and MOVING a V.I.N.


[/ QUOTE ]


You seem to be basing your opinion completely on the above statement.

You are incorrectly interpreting the statute. No where in the Federal Statutes that you cite does it say that MOVING the VIN to another body is a legally permissible exception. I have yet to find a State statute that specifically permits it either. Have you?

The Federal statututory exception addresses removing the VIN during a repair, to affect that repair and then refers to replacing it on THE SAME vehicle during that repair process. It never mentions MOVING it somewhere else.

You have some very intelligently stated opinions, but as even you said, that is all they are, opinions.

As a restorer, I would rather err on the side of not facing the possibility of civil lawsuits or criminal penalties than err on the side of looking over my shoulder for the cops (less likely) or some disgruntled purchaser with a flock of lawyers for the next 10 years (far more likely).

If you really want to have a rebody exception to the Federal stautes, someone has to put that into a bill form and run it through their senator or congressman. I hereby nominate you to do that. That would settle the argument once and for all and I could finally put down my keyboard and mouse forever.

[/ QUOTE ]




I am interpeting the statuate as written. The REPAIR can be many different things depending on the condition of the subject vehicle and what it needs to effect that repair. If the dash, or door, door frame where the V.I.N. is attached needs to be replaced it appears to me to be legal under the law. Who is going to stand there during repair/restoration during this process of the work to determine what was necessary?

People that challenge these things on a particular vehicle would have to be THERE with witnesses at the time it is done to offer any PROOF of what has taken place. Very hard to PROVE in court if it ever got this far. Personally, I applaude the people that step forward and tell the truth about what they have done.

I would much rather have a car that was restored with a donor body, parts/model specific switching, rather than one that was RESTORED by welding togather a bunch of donor parts on a body that was full of rust and tweeked in an accident. That car is a train wreck waiting to happen in a future accident.

Well, the below underlined verbage spells it out for me. As you know, anyone can take anything to task in court, but I believe the below (from the Federal law) speaks for itrself.

a person who repairs such vehicle or part, if the removal, obliteration, tampering, or alteration is reasonably necessary for the repair

a person who restores or replaces an identification number for such vehicle or part in accordance with applicable State law

if that person is the owner of the motor vehicle, or is authorized to remove, obliterate, tamper with or alter the decal or device by— (i) the owner or his authorized agent

The thing we have to keep in mind for the HOBBY is the INTENT of the law. If you legally own BOTH cars and there are no stolen parts involved, then this is considered RESTORATION and has nothing to do with what the law was INTENDED for which is to twart car theives and chop shops.

Then there is the answer from Dynacorn that clealy state the expect many people to use their EXISTING V.I.N. on the new bodies they sell.

[njsteve]

A successful criminal prosecution or civil action does not require a human witness to the crime having occurred. Enough physical and/or circumstantial evidence is, in most cases, more than often enough to surpass the minumum standard - in a civil action which is the preponderance of the evidence, and in a criminal action, beyond a reasonable doubt. Jurors just love that CSI stuff these days. They just eat it up. One of these cases would involve all sorts of cool toolmark and trace evidence testimony. Imagine someone's entire toolbox being used to convict them when they match the microscopic scratch marks on the back of the VIN plate to that favorite screwdriver in the top left drawer. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif

As for Dynacorn, they only refer you back to your local state statutes, their FAQ section would be of no precedential legal value in court.


By the way did anybody see this, just hot off of the CNN newswire:

"The leader of a group of African-American converts to Islam was fatally shot Wednesday, federal authorities said.
Luquman Ameen Abdullah was one of 11 men charged Tuesday with conspiracy to commit federal crimes, including theft from interstate shipments, mail fraud to obtain the proceeds of arson, illegal possession and sale of firearms, AND TAMPERING WITH MOTOR VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS, the FBI said in a news release."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/28/michigan.fbi.shooting/index.html

[RichSchmidt]

Thats why if you are going to do this,get the right body{close to date correct and maybe even the same color} and do it right.Drill out the spot welds on any panel that has a hidden vin on both cars,weld the panels back together with the numbers on which car you want them,grind and work the metal to look flawlessly original,and then media blast the entire area so that the handiwork is undetectable.it can be done.If all else fails,use the firewall from the rusty car and graft it into the donor body.Keep your mouth shut and never tell ANYBODY.Good luck.

[RamAirDave]

[ QUOTE ]
I personally had a 1966 Corvette that was stolen and recovered that the V.I.N. tag was removed and destroyed by the theives during the time it was missing. I was able to LEGALLY have an accurate reproduction V.I.N. plate made and re-installed on the car.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't know there was a legal way to have a reproduction VIN plate made. New state-issued VIN with the original #s, sure.

But an "accurate reproduction?" My understanding has always been that making VIN tags is a pretty big no-no and a federal crime. Did you get it through the state gov or through one of the underground guys making them?

[MultiMopars]

A successful criminal prosecution or civil action does not require a human witness to the crime having occurred. Enough physical and/or circumstantial evidence is, in most cases, more than often enough to surpass the minumum standard - in a civil action which is the preponderance of the evidence, and in a criminal action, beyond a reasonable doubt. Jurors just love that CSI stuff these days. They just eat it up. One of these cases would involve all sorts of cool toolmark and trace evidence testimony. Imagine someone's entire toolbox being used to convict them when they match the microscopic scratch marks on the back of the VIN plate to that favorite screwdriver in the top left drawer.

As for Dynacorn, they only refer you back to your local state statutes, their FAQ section would be of no precedential legal value in court.


By the way did anybody see this, just hot off of the CNN newswire:

"The leader of a group of African-American converts to Islam was fatally shot Wednesday, federal authorities said.
Luquman Ameen Abdullah was one of 11 men charged Tuesday with conspiracy to commit federal crimes, including theft from interstate shipments, mail fraud to obtain the proceeds of arson, illegal possession and sale of firearms, AND TAMPERING WITH MOTOR VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS, the FBI said in a news release."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/28/michigan.fbi.shooting/index.html


That is all well and good in a case where someone dies and there are unexhaustable funds to prosecute something like that. However in the case of a rebodied car it would certainly be a civil case with individual funds being spent based on one party believing they were defrauded with the purchase of a mis-represented vehicle that was something less than it is. HUGH dollars to be spent and a lot of risk of the outcome, HIGHLY unlikely it would ever go to or see an end if started. This would require to first determine if the car was restored or rebodied OR if in fact their is a difference in the eyes of the law AND if in fact there were any laws broken doing so. Sound familiar? Go back to the "catch 22"


You seemed to have missed Dynacorns first option:

Answer: 2005/06/29

A Vehicle or Vessel Identification Number (VIN) is issued by a manufacturer or State Licensing authority. There are three ways for a vehicle to obtain a number.

1) An existing VIN on a vehicle that is titled in your name can be transferred to a repair part (as instructed by your State authority).
2) A number may be issued by your State to ID a custom built vehicle when it passes a safety and number verification inspection.
3) A licensed manufacturer issued a VIN when the vehicle (or vessel) is made and ready for delivery. This can only be issued when a "turn key" (completed) car, truck, boat or aircraft has been manufactured.

Dynacorn is a G.M. licensed manufacturer of replacement body shells, which is a PART not a complete vehicle. You can attach an existing V.I.N. to a replacement part for repair or restoration as per the Federal law.

You will also note in my first post that I too made reference to other state laws.

"it is my understanding that some States have laws against it that do not spell out exceptions for the hobby. However, any links to individual State laws that have been sent to me I HAVE found a similar exception to the Fed. law."

No sense arguing this any further.

In closing I will say as I did long ago in this post, it is something that is going to be argued for a long time. Even if someone takes this to task and the law makes a determination that there is a difference in restoration vs. rebody there will STILL be people that argue it as an ETHICAL thing.
I don't believe there is any State or Federal task force out there looking for people that are moving V.I.N.s from one car to another between two cars that they own legally and are not stolen for the purpose of restoring a car. It would be a HUGH waste of taxpayers money.

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I personally had a 1966 Corvette that was stolen and recovered that the V.I.N. tag was removed and destroyed by the theives during the time it was missing. I was able to LEGALLY have an accurate reproduction V.I.N. plate made and re-installed on the car.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't know there was a legal way to have a reproduction VIN plate made. New state-issued VIN with the original #s, sure.

But an "accurate reproduction?" My understanding has always been that making VIN tags is a pretty big no-no and a federal crime. Did you get it through the state gov or through one of the underground guys making them?

[/ QUOTE ]



Not an underground thing but the people that make them don't advertise it. If they did they would never get off the phone with the criminal element trying to buy them.

Yes, it is possible, but the people that make them have requirements that vary from state to state that included for me being in Arizona, a State form and inspection from a State offical that spelled out the circumstances. It is not something that is easily done and has safeguards in place to keep things legal.

[67BelAir427]

[ QUOTE ]
Thats why if you are going to do this,get the right body{close to date correct and maybe even the same color} and do it right.Drill out the spot welds on any panel that has a hidden vin on both cars,weld the panels back together with the numbers on which car you want them,grind and work the metal to look flawlessly original,and then media blast the entire area so that the handiwork is undetectable.it can be done.If all else fails,use the firewall from the rusty car and graft it into the donor body.Keep your mouth shut and never tell ANYBODY.Good luck.

[/ QUOTE ]

And one more thing. If you ever plan to sell a car to anyone in the future, make sure that you have never made a public post on the internet about "how to commit a Federal crime" using your own name! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif

[Dave Rifkin]

OH MY GOD!!!!!!, make it stop http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif

[Steven J]

[quoteI didn't know there was a legal way to have a reproduction VIN plate made. New state-issued VIN with the original #s, sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't speak for the rest of the country, but Illinois issues a new VIN plate from the state police. It is mounted in the door jamb and does not look original.

On a side note, I saw photos of a green "ZL-1" Camaro that the ISP inspected many years ago that was a rebody. If I'm not mistaken, they didn't pursue criminal charges, just left it up to the civil process.

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
[quoteI didn't know there was a legal way to have a reproduction VIN plate made. New state-issued VIN with the original #s, sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't speak for the rest of the country, but Illinois issues a new VIN plate from the state police. It is mounted in the door jamb and does not look original.

On a side note, I saw photos of a green "ZL-1" Camaro that the ISP inspected many years ago that was a rebody. If I'm not mistaken, they didn't pursue criminal charges, just left it up to the civil process.

[/ QUOTE ]

So does Arizona in most cases. I am sure that if I had taken the car to the DMV office that they would have wanted to put one on. I had on of tghe officer's that investigated the thieft fill out the proper forms for the people that made the V.I.N. plate.

[RichSchmidt]

And one more thing. If you ever plan to sell a car to anyone in the future, make sure that you have never made a public post on the internet about "how to commit a Federal crime" using your own name! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody would actually pay money for any of my junks anyhow.Usually by the time I am done fixing up a car I have to pay somebody to haul it away:) But the truth is that I would have been more likely to have done this back in the day to put a title on a race car with no papers so I could street race it,and back then it would have been more common to have taken a real bigblock SS car and tag it with a tag from a rotted out 6 cylinder thus making the car worth less in the long run,but that was back when "fixing up" your Camaro meant taking a sawzall to the wheel openings to hang some 13 inch wide slicks way out the side of it.