What is and original car, any lawyer will prove its not.

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration
Model T Ford Forum: Forum 2012: What is and original car, any lawyer will prove its not.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ray Green on Saturday, May 12, 2012 - 08:34 pm:

Now this involves a Rolls but it could come down to a T offered for sale and with Lawyers of today you could be sued.
People who sell model "T's" and call the car original should read this and maybe we would have less original car sellers. Here is some thing any one who sell cars as ORIGINAL should read as it could happen to you.

Is it an Original vehicle, Appeal over Vintage Car Case Upheld in England.
The English court has made this ruling and in some ways this could happen here if you wanted to push the point and a good lawyer as how many ads do you see telling you that it is an original car?.......
An appeal court recently heard a case on whether a vintage car should be deemed authentic after a good number of its original components were replaced. An earlier decision to award a buyer following significant work was done on a 1930 Speed Six Bentley was considered unreliable by the appeal court. The vintage car was a Bentley valued at £425,000 and was purchased in 2007 by Mercedes Brewer, a US businesswoman, from a notable dealer with the belief that it still had its original components. However following her discovery, she was awarded £90,000 for damages from Stanley Mann, which maintained that she already knew of the repairs made on the vintage car before it was purchased. The lawyers who represented Mr. Mann indicated that the sale of the vintage car as a 1930 Bentley Speed Six does not signify that all components were original as the description is not relevant to restoration work on the vintage car. The earlier decision was disapproved by Lord Justice Rix together with Lords Justice Lewison and Sullivan. According to the judges, the Bentley Speed Six will remain as a Bentley Speed Six even though it has falling apart prior to being restored. The decision was accepted by Mr. Mann indicating that the earlier decision on the vintage car will have a significant effect of the antiques Market. Mr. Mann said that eighty-year-old vintage cars would require some components to be replaced at some point in time. The recent decision was favorable to the vintage car industry and if the earlier decision was sustain, the antiques market would be very much affected. The legal tussle started when the Bentley was purchased by Mrs. Brewer almost five years before. The Bentley Speed Six was unveiled in the 1920s and is considered as the best vintage car that was produced by Bentley. The vintage car offered 180HP due to its six-and-one-half liter engine and was the most successful race car of Bentley as it won the Le Mans twice. According to Mrs. Brewer, the only original component of the vehicle was its chassis since the engine was reported rebuilt. The earlier decision was reached by Judge Anthony Thornton since the work on the vintage car was extensive enough not to call it a 1930 Bentley Speed Six Car The decision on the vintage car was disapproved by the appeal judges since the evidence presented was misunderstood and the appeal judges regretted the results although the decision was made since there a loss of objectivity in the judge that made the earlier decision.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Royce in Dallas TX on Saturday, May 12, 2012 - 09:10 pm:

If you have enough money and time you can get lawyers and judges to agree with anything you might say or do. This has been true since Roman times. I don't see anything interesting in what you presented here Ray.

It is a case of a rich stupid person "prevailing" over logic and reason because they are rich.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By John Cassara Long Island, NY on Saturday, May 12, 2012 - 10:11 pm:

Royce she still got £90,000 back. And the seller lost 90,0000 and paid at least his legal fees. The literal definition of original condition would be as Henry sold it. Restored, repaired, f#cked with all changes that. We apply the same logic here when someone says rebuilt motor. What does that mean? New rings and a honing or $4,000 of machine work, parts and babbiting. Seller beware! Buyer beware!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ray Green on Sunday, May 13, 2012 - 04:57 am:

Hey Royce, you dont watch enough of Judge Judy, those on her show sue for all they can get on a $6000 car but it was there for those that are interested that Roll/Bentley owner have problems, your not interested so read another thread then... Ray


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Chris Martin on Sunday, May 13, 2012 - 06:39 am:

Not sure what source Ray is attempting to quote there, but the way I heard it the Bentley (which had nothing to do with Rolls Royce) was sold with an engine rebuilt to Speed Six specification. Which it was. The buyer, (and the way I heard it, she is a lawyer herself) thought this should have been the original engine and sued when she realised it wasn't. It was the correct specification for the car, just not the original one. I believe it was never claimed to be so.
For what I have read of the case, I would certainly side with Stanley Mann. He is, and has been for more than thirty years that I know of, probably the best known dealer specialising in pre-Rolls Royce Bentleys in Britain and would not risk such a reputation for the sake of misrepresenting one car.
As for the old argument over what is original, has the oil been changed? Is the air in the tyres that which was pumped in at the factory?
You may say they are just consumables that were intended to be replaced. Well so were piston rings, main bearings, thrust washers etc; all components designed to wear and therefore be renewed. So where does anyone draw the line; an engine rebuild, new clutch, brake linings, diff' rebuild, whatever. So an engine rebuilt using correct parts in a different cylinder block? Or crankcase? Which components must remain original, just those that have stamped numbers?
How many T people have built up a 1911 T for example by starting with just a 1911 dated block and sourcing matching parts to suit?
No, all of this is irrelevant, unless one can absolutely guarantee without doubt a known history from the day it left the factory, we can never really know for sure how much of any car is 'original'.
Get the point?
Chris M.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Wayne Sheldon, Grass Valley, CA on Sunday, May 13, 2012 - 05:59 pm:

The argument I have used for years, boils down to "that is a line that is not difficult to draw, it is impossible".
Other than letting go of a car I would like to keep, the main reason I hate selling cars is that I don't like misunderstandings about them. There is no such thing as an antique automobile without serious flaws, real or imagined. No matter how original it appears, something was done, or not done, that someone would think was inappropriate.
Several cars I have had, were bought as good cars. I have always tried to do some things to improve them. I have always tried to let cars go better than they were when I got them.
Most of my cars, especially Ts, were really in bad shape when I got them. Many of them were little more than a few bad pieces left of something that once was. But I scrounged the missing pieces, used original methods, and tried to restore those bits back to a good representation of what was before. Is it "restoration", or "recreation", or a pile of junk? While I try to not put down a car I am selling, I have been known to spend an hour going over the entire car trying to explain everything that is or is not original. Everything that is or is not correct. Only one T I ever "restored" had what I called a "rebuilt" engine. I often call them reworked, or overhauled. I will tell in detail what was or wasn't done. And often the reasons for those decisions.
Some people really think they should get the "silk purse" when they buy the "sow's ear". (I don't think any of the cars I've sold have been that bad). What has amazed me, is the number of people that could nit-pic a car that is already priced very reasonably. Sometimes, I think pricing a car to sell because you need to sell it, attracts people that want the moon for a buck. Sometimes, high end buyers can be the same way. It is a strange world. Maybe that is why I like antique automobiles (and antique car people) more than I like most people.
And to Joe, our new member with the 192? touring with a steel firewall. Don't worry about it. Just wonder about the mystery of why. Keep it that way. Maybe keep notes in a sealed bag under the seat for future owners to ponder. And enjoy that very nice older restoration. My opinion.
Drive carefully, and enjoy, W2


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Gary H. White - Sheridan, MI on Sunday, May 13, 2012 - 07:24 pm:

When selling a used car ALWAYS put "Sold as is where is" on bill of sale. Wife sold her seven year old Audi once to a college kid. He brought his dad and another guy who test drove the car before buying it. A week or so later he called and said the front had a vibration at highway speed and wanted us to pay for repairs. I told him my wife did not have a problem with any vibration (true but she is a rather slow driver) and that he inspected the car before buying and it was his responsibility. He took us to court and presented a legal page list of items he said were wrong with the car. Mostly what you would expect on a seven year old car. He had taken it to an import car dealership and had it gone over from bumper to bumper. One item was the brakes pads were worn. (They were serviceable but worn.) The judge said you can't sell a car with "bad brakes" and ordered us to pay for part of the brake job. As for the front vibration turns out the wheels just needed balanced. The worst part is a lost court case stays on your credit report for several years.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Chris Martin on Sunday, May 13, 2012 - 07:34 pm:

Gary, the story Ray mentioned at the top referred to a high end collector car sold by one of the best known specialists in the field for £425,000 (pounds sterling).
While I appreciate it is common for threads to go way off topic on this forum, I hardly think either party would have been happy with "Sold as is where is" as a binding contract !!!
Chris M.

The following news link probably explains it best;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/classiccars/9131682/Appeal-upheld-over-rare- vintage-Bentley.html


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Gary H. White - Sheridan, MI on Sunday, May 13, 2012 - 08:17 pm:

Excuse me.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ray Green on Monday, May 14, 2012 - 10:39 am:

Chris, I put the thread up as a item of interest as we see so many items listed as original but are they?, I quoted a story that is on the net from England in a online magazine which I subscribe to. I did not put it there to start a gutter fight with you or be pulled into one and did not put any one down which seems to be implied in your posting.
Really who cares that Bentley is now not British owned any more and carries a VW badge. Ray


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By William L Vanderburg on Monday, May 14, 2012 - 02:14 pm:

He bought it back from her, and resold it six months ago. She doesn't even own it anymore and wanted money. WTF


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Darel J. Leipold on Monday, May 14, 2012 - 02:37 pm:

An automobile is original only once. This is a common saying and is true. One needs to be careful with the term "original" as well as "authentic" and "restored". The term restored implies that the vehicle was returned to what it was when it left the factory. This is actually impossible. "Rebuilt to factory specifications" would better describe what has been done to a particular vehicle. It is interesting that very few of the vehicles described as being "Restored" have been returned to factory specifications. Rebuilding an engine with insert bearings is not original and there fore the engine has been rebuilt, not restored.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jeff Hood on Monday, May 14, 2012 - 03:42 pm:

I think that the point is to be very, very detailed on what has and hasn't been done to the car, and what may not be original and/or "correct" and put it in writing and get the buyer to sign it!

In a similar situation, I recently sold a toy car on E-Bay. I was very detailed in my description and posted 6 pictures showing a broken plastic windshield, missing hubcap, scratches, etc. The winning bid was way higher that the rest, and after I sent the item, the winner complained about the very things that were shown in the pics and described in detail. He wanted a partial refund. I told him no, and said I would give a full refund if he would send it back. He did not send it back, but did post a very bad review.

It is seemingly the new way of doing business. Negotiate the price after the deal is made. Threaten retaliation if your lower price is not met.


Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.
Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration