Have a read of the latest Unique Cars article on the Victorian court case. Anyone sold a classic lately as an original and which may have had serious work done post 1986? Have a read. You may be up for big $ in the future.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr Bob Dobalina
give us a summary please byro

---

i'm with Bob, anymore details? i'm not buying a magazine for 1 article

You'll have to read it to get the full gist. Summary (I think the story is about a Phase III, you'll see what I mean when you read it):

Civil court case.
Car bought in 1998 as a "Fully restored classic in immaculate condition". Had a factory replacement engine in it.
Onsold in 2004.
Car accepted as authentic by clubs.
By 2008 new owner became aware that it might have been a reshell, Police foresics pulled the car apart and proved so.
New post 2004 owner had fitted a new engine restamped with original engine number for the ID plates.

First owner was cleared of any criminal wrongdoings by Police. But Police removed the ID plates, destroyed them and put the vehicle off the road now only a parts car.

Post 2004 owner took civil action.

1998-2004 owner unable to furnish details of person he bought the car from. Court criticised him for not 100% verifying authenticity of the car. However noted there was no evidence to suggest seller had any reason to doubt authenticity of the car.

Rulng was based solely upon precedents that what was received was not what was advertised, regardless of seller being innocent of building the fake. Therefore original seller had to pay buyer $75,000 plus $7000 court costs and buyer got to keep the car which was valued at $25,000.

So in other words you cannot advertise for sale a car you have any doubt about as original. You must be 100% honest PLUS 100% accurate (even if you have no knowledge as such) of what it is. So to totally cover yourself you can only advertise cars as "looks like original" or "appears to be original" unless you are certain otherwise.

Makes survivor cars all that more valuable in my eyes.

the world is nuts!!

How do you know any car is legit?

the people who build these dodgy cars wreck it for everyone I suppose.

Or be smart when advertising and let the car sell itself. Without seeing the full case documents it is hard to tell the extent of what this means as a precedent either. The magazine expands more on this. Like if one were to rebuild a HT GTS from a firewall using all new or good secondhand or repro body panels joined at the factory lines but ID plates untouched. As long as there was no claims that the car was original, but the truth was told that it had been totally rebuilt using new or used sheetmetal has the precedent any application? Examples like this are suggested in the article.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr Bob Dobalina
yep buyer beware, just have to advertise any car as "appears to be a Holden HT Monaro with GTS features". If they don't ask you don't have to tell them. This is the way we are heading in our more litigious society

---

bob i have noticed over the last few months people have already started putting APPEARS TO BE in the listing sad but true looks like the only way to cover your ass.....

Edited by user Friday, 2 September 2011 7:29:18 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

be like a news report. I am selling an alledged gtho falcon. It appears to have 4 doors and a steering wheel. Rumour has it that if you turn the key it goes.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr Bob Dobalina
alleged. lol. i like that one.

unnamed sources claim it was repainted in 1988

---

and its authenticity verified by a beer swilling guru that loves the phrase "remember when we used to race them and they were everywhere" pffftt

age old argurement this one about originality and restamping etc, only gunna get worse as more experts lay their 15 mins of fame claiming when they used to mave them etc. buyer beware as stated above, trouble is some dik that knows better, or claims to know better ruins it for everyone picking on a spot weld on an inner sill or under the dash