|
|
|
|
|
|
It does sound like a way to get all the (probably tax exempt) logbooks currently sat on sorn with no actual body to speak of back on the road, with a lot of later cars disappearing.
How many more "Historical documents" related to pre '73 cars do you think will be on ebay within a month of this going live?
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a bad idea. If someone had a rotten car with id, whats stopping the more dishonest type ordering a car to be 'obtained', then striping it of its ID, slapping the ID of the rotten car on it and.... er......... ringing it?
When my dad built his Maxi he started off with a brand new bodyshell and a 1978 car that was used as a runner for a year before being reshelled onto the new 'shell. When he rebuilt the car he used 99% new parts, meaning the orignal car was effectivly restored onto a brandnew shell. Nowt wrong with that, happens with Minis all the time. Now that its my turn to rebuild the car my way I had a choice. With a 1972 scrapper that weve owned for 8 or so years sitting on the drive I could easily have rebuilt the car using the 1972 ID as the shells only ID is plates on the front panel, there is nothing stamped in the (new) shell anywhere else. It would be easy, and also WRONG as the car has already existed with the 1978 ID.
If this idea of Mr Stretton (i neither know nor care who he is) came to law it would just create a written invitation for ringing and would also invite all sorts of other undesirable activities. Its a bloody crazy idea.
|
| |
Last Edit: Jul 1, 2011 22:41:30 GMT by bmcnut
|
|
dungbug
Posted a lot
'Ooligan!
Posts: 2,852
|
|
|
|
The point I made in the last thread was why the need to use the I.D of the old body that was duff and not the I.D of the replacment? If both have I.D's (which they should have) then what difference does it make which reg is used? Mr Stretton didn't answer this quite obvious & basic question for some reason. If it's being reshelled with a shell that has no I.D of it's own then there's a system in place to get the car legally registered already. As said before, stuff is sometimes ment to die. Sad but true, just make's the vehicles that do survive, that are cared for, a little more rarer/valuable. I think the proposal would open a can of worms and would be exploited for the wrong reasons and innocent parties would be on the receiving end, either having their pride & joy pinched so t can 'adopt' the I.D of a sh*tter that was picked up cheap or the poor sod who thinks he's buying a car (reshelled being stated on the V5) but he's actually brought a car that was owned, loved & stolen. As said, sounds like the proposal will almost assist the crooks out there commiting crime. Another point raised last time round which Mr Stretton decided not to go into in any detail.  Maybe you're right Team Blitz, why should I give a stuff eitherway. Why should I can if the people involved in the same hobbt as me end up getting their motor's pinched, given new I.D's & sold on? Who care's?  |
| |
Past: 13 VW Beetles from 1967 - 1974
Bay Window Campers (1973 & 1974)
Mini's (1992 Cooper lookalike & 1984 '25 Anniversary)
MK2 Polo Coupe S (1984 & 1986)
MK2 Polo Breadvan (1981 & 1984)
MK4 Escort (1989)
MK2 Granada Based Hearse (seriously)
Fiat Uno 60S (1986) Punto 60S (1998) Cinq (1997)
1998 Yamaha YZF600R Thundercat
2003 Ford KA
Current: 2004 Ford Focus (barely alive)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The point I made in the last thread was why the need to use the I.D of the old body that was duff and not the I.D of the replacment? If both have I.D's (which they should have) then what difference does it make which reg is used? Mr Stretton didn't answer this quite obvious & basic question for some reason. If it's being reshelled with a shell that has no I.D of it's own then there's a system in place to get the car legally registered already. As said before, stuff is sometimes ment to die. Sad but true, just make's the vehicles that do survive, that are cared for, a little more rarer/valuable. I think the proposal would open a can of worms and would be exploited for the wrong reasons and innocent parties would be on the receiving end, either having their pride & joy pinched so t can 'adopt' the I.D of a sh*tter that was picked up cheap or the poor sod who thinks he's buying a car (reshelled being stated on the V5) but he's actually brought a car that was owned, loved & stolen. As said, sounds like the proposal will almost assist the crooks out there commiting crime. Another point raised last time round which Mr Stretton decided not to go into in any detail. Maybe you're right Team Blitz, why should I give a stuff eitherway. Why should I can if the people involved in the same hobbt as me end up getting their motor's pinched, given new I.D's & sold on? Who care's? 100% |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm confused, maybe through the drink...
But it just seems that every one who's in favour of this is saying "well it happens anyway so why not make it legal?"
Just because some thing goes on doesn't make it right, child abuse goes on, should we make that legal too?
There is no reason what so ever to carry another ID of a car on to another. If one is historically important but with a shafted shell then the owners should of thought about that before they crashed it or left it to rust. If it was that historically important then they should of taken better care of it.
All this would do is make ringing certain cars legal and making it legal for people to make money from doing this, how is that a good thing for the classic car scene?
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a bad idea. If someone had a rotten car with id, whats stopping the more dishonest type ordering a car to be 'obtained', then striping it of its ID, slapping the ID of the rotten car on it and.... er......... ringing it? That's laughable. So you think a crook would order a car to be stolen, then file papers with the GOVERNMENT that he's switching ID tags, from one to another shell, document it, and affix a permanent stamping to the re-shell, so that both the car and the car's paperwork scream "Hey, Dummy! I've been re-shelled!"? And then under pain of confiscation, with his name, address, photo ID, and full details on file with the GOVERNMENT, he would then succeed in blending into the woodwork! Oh, yeah. That's what a crook would do. ;D Jeebers, man, he would do all you say right now TODAY, with no laws changed, as crooks have always done, and simply not tell a soul! What crook would EVER go on record as switching a VIN#? LOL!!!! I've said my piece. Now we're off into "Yeah, What-He-Said-100% Land" instead of "Rational World". |
| |
 Team Blitz Ford Capri parts worldwide: Restoration, Road, or Race. Used, Repro, and NOS, ranging from scabby to perfect. Itching your Capri jones since 1979! Buy, sell, trade. www.teamblitz.com blitz@teamblitz.com |
|
chaseracer
Part of things
If you have to ask why, you will never understand...
Posts: 597
|
|
|
|
Though obviously it causes me real & physical pain to agree with a liberal-hating, Rush Limbaugh-listening neo-con such as Norm*, he makes a very good point. * WARNING: the first clause of the statement above contains extremely high levels of irony...  |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a bad idea. If someone had a rotten car with id, whats stopping the more dishonest type ordering a car to be 'obtained', then striping it of its ID, slapping the ID of the rotten car on it and.... er......... ringing it? You're seriously asking this? Today you could do that and simply get away with it. Under these proposals you'd have to prove where the shell came from and have it documented. Therefore there would be less actual crime. I can't understand why people are so against this idea? How many of you out there really feel that it would change your life dramatically if you went to look at a car and there was documented evidence that it had been re-shelled? As has been said, you can do it with body in white and no one bats an eyelid. Why not with another shell? |
| |
Last Edit: Jul 2, 2011 10:28:18 GMT by jnoiles
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a bad idea. If someone had a rotten car with id, whats stopping the more dishonest type ordering a car to be 'obtained', then striping it of its ID, slapping the ID of the rotten car on it and.... er......... ringing it? That's laughable. So you think a crook would order a car to be stolen, then file papers with the GOVERNMENT that he's switching ID tags, from one to another shell, document it, and affix a permanent stamping to the re-shell, so that both the car and the car's paperwork scream "Hey, Dummy! I've been re-shelled!"? And then under pain of confiscation, with his name, address, photo ID, and full details on file with the GOVERNMENT, he would then succeed in blending into the woodwork! Oh, yeah. That's what a crook would do. ;D Jeebers, man, he would do all you say right now TODAY, with no laws changed, as crooks have always done, and simply not tell a soul! What crook would EVER go on record as switching a VIN#? LOL!!!! I've said my piece. Now we're off into "Yeah, What-He-Said-100% Land" instead of "Rational World". A crook probably won't register it but it would make it more difficult to tell which had been ringed from a stolen car and which have been ringed legally. If some one rights off a RS500 and then reshelled it into a 3 door diesel shell and tries to pass it off as RS500 number whatever how is this right? It's no longer the same car, the shell is different and any thing damaged in the crash will be. Yes it goes on now but at least if you see a car that you can tell its happened to you know that its a ringer and you should walk away. Crooks would still carry on doing what they have been doing for years, only if this was brought in they would have a legal cloak to hide behind No ones forcing a buyer to buy the car and he can still walk away but it would make it harder to tell the genuine reshelled cars from the stolen and ringed cars. this might not bring any increase in the amount of classic cars stolen, but it would make it easier for ringed cars to sold in the open market. As I said in my last post, just because some thing illegal goes on now doesn't mean we should make it legal. |
| |
|
|
1900sr
Part of things
I like Mantas me!
Posts: 875
|
|
|
|
|
I think anyone replying to this ought to actually read the proposal before doing so. The proposal does state that a "legally" re-shelled car would have an amended chassis number (maybe an R suffix) to show it, and the V5 would also be marked as such, and that both shells should be available for insepction, thus meaning that someone with a tax exempt V5 and chassis plate from an already scrapped car couldn't swap them legally.
I think my main issue is that we would see even less examples of cooking models saved, as someone with a rotten "desirable" model would buy a surviving base spec car and swap bits and IDs. In Gary Stretton's case, he has a 99GL with a knackered engine, and a totally rotten 99 Turbo. He stated that he is not willing to repair the GL unless it can "become" the Turbo. That's what struck me as wrong, especially coming from the editor of a magazine that professes to deal with everyday classics.
Personally I'm not in favour, however I don't think that cars re-shelled into new shells should retain their original ID either. If however we agree that this is acceptable then there is no real reason why the proposal shouldn't be either.
|
| |
Last Edit: Jul 2, 2011 12:50:54 GMT by 1900sr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Must of missed the 'r' bit  But surely that makes the whole thing pointless? It would be obvious from the chassis number that this car isn't the original (insert desirable classic here) and infact its just a re-shell and therefore no more desirable than any other lower spec model retro fitted with hi spec parts. For example as things stand if a polo g40 is reshelled into a 1 litre shell it doesn't hold its value any where near as well as a genuine g40. Even if it had the reg swapped with the engine it would still be obvious that its not a genuine g40 and is just a re-shell and worth a lot less than a genuine one. Seems like an expensive and pointless exercise? |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Must of missed the 'r' bit But surely that makes the whole thing pointless? It would be obvious from the chassis number that this car isn't the original (insert desirable classic here) and infact its just a re-shell and therefore no more desirable than any other lower spec model retro fitted with hi spec parts. Well, duh. ;D Eureka! |
| |
Team Blitz Ford Capri parts worldwide: Restoration, Road, or Race. Used, Repro, and NOS, ranging from scabby to perfect. Itching your Capri jones since 1979! Buy, sell, trade. www.teamblitz.com blitz@teamblitz.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Except "the exercise" isn't "pointless" to an honest bloke with 2 or 3 snotters he wishes to consolidate into one good shell, who's willing to chase all this through the legal system as proposed by Stretton. No harm. No foul. ZERO deception. FULL consumer protection to all subsequent buyers. Good god.....
|
| |
Team Blitz Ford Capri parts worldwide: Restoration, Road, or Race. Used, Repro, and NOS, ranging from scabby to perfect. Itching your Capri jones since 1979! Buy, sell, trade. www.teamblitz.com blitz@teamblitz.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why on earths name is the replacement (second hand) shells reg number not good enough? A wiffle ball pitch! You presume the replacement shell has a reg number. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. I've seen acres of secondhand rust-free shells without registrations. If it doesn't matter to a subsequent BUYER/OWNER that a re-shell has occurred, then why does it matter to you? Any more than Bozo pipes, or Shako nose-jobs, or colostomy bag oil coolers, or motorcycle engine swaps, or neon chassis lights. Why do you care? There are no victims. Somebody gets to put a car together from broken cars. And the whole world is put on notice that he did it. Every other kind car craft is "It's his money" and "OK", except this one? Because it does matter over here. You could have a car with 17,000 miles on it in the garden, But rotten as a pear. Then you buy a 200,000 mile shell and swap all the bits, If he had his way the swap would involve the 17,000 mile cars registration too. Meaning no one would ever know it spent the last 20 years rotting away. And the low milage means nothing as it wasnt cared for in the slightest. If its all as simple as wanting to keep the car going. The new shell should have a reg. If for some obscure reason it doesnt. Theres not alot stopping you applying for an age related one as thousands of people have done before. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't say I massively care about this, but for what it's worth I think Norm is right. Even if he just likes playing devils advocate Thank you and good night RRers! |
| |
Sierra - here we go again! He has an illness, it's not his fault.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Except "the exercise" isn't "pointless" to an honest bloke with 2 or 3 snotters he wishes to consolidate into one good shell, who's willing to chase all this through the legal system as proposed by Stretton. No harm. No foul. ZERO deception. FULL consumer protection to all subsequent buyers. Good god..... But it is pointless though, the reshelled car will only have the original number plate, not the original chassis number so you are not really any further forward are you? That r in the chassis number shows that the car hasn't got the historical significance that the number plate suggests and it isn't going to carry the value that an original would. So what would be the point in doing this when you could just re-shell in to a lower spec car and keep that ID and still be in the same boat without the cost and red tape involved in swapping the ID over on to a car that shouldn't have it? As soon as the chassis number has been modified the whole point of the exercise (the doner shell keeping the original id) has gone out of the window because its no longer the original ID. |
| |
Last Edit: Jul 3, 2011 0:52:03 GMT by roccoguy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Must of missed the 'r' bit But surely that makes the whole thing pointless? It would be obvious from the chassis number that this car isn't the original (insert desirable classic here) and infact its just a re-shell and therefore no more desirable than any other lower spec model retro fitted with hi spec parts. Well, duh. ;D Eureka! Hmmm I notice you didn't include the part of my post where I pointed out an example of why its a pointless exercise. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But it is pointless though, the reshelled car will only have the original number plate, not the original chassis number so you are not really any further forward are you? That r in the chassis number shows that the car hasn't got the historical significance that the number plate suggests and it isn't going to carry the value that an original would. So what would be the point in doing this when you could just re-shell in to a lower spec car and keep that ID and still be in the same boat without the cost and red tape involved in swapping the ID over on to a car that shouldn't have it? As soon as the chassis number has been modified the whole point of the exercise (the doner shell keeping the original id) has gone out of the window because its no longer the original ID. Rocco, the horse is flogged, it's breathing its last breath, it's got tombstones in its eyes, and I shan't beat the horse dead. Except to say, if you cannot understand the enthusiast's goal in keeping a higher spec ID alive, even if on a low-spec shell, then you must also not understand putting BBS wheels on a 500-quid Sierra, or putting a high-spec body kit on a basemodel Golf, or a million other "irrational" decisions by car owners who want to grab at the brass ring within their bank balance limits. At least you're now only questioning the wisdom of the re-ID, and that's where two honest men can also disagree. But there's no question of deceit here. For a low mile original is often a pile of crepe mechanically for a whole host of reasons. This is why "caveat emptor" applies to all wheeled purchases, whether new or used, whether orig ID or (if enacted) re-ID'd. |
| |
Team Blitz Ford Capri parts worldwide: Restoration, Road, or Race. Used, Repro, and NOS, ranging from scabby to perfect. Itching your Capri jones since 1979! Buy, sell, trade. www.teamblitz.com blitz@teamblitz.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
So what would be the point in doing this when you could just re-shell in to a lower spec car and keep that ID and still be in the same boat without the cost and red tape involved in swapping the ID over on to a car that shouldn't have it? And a detail: Because you cannot re-shell in to a lower spec car. That's why. That's the whole POINT of Stretton's proposal. You as a simple privateer can neither re-shell to a high-spec shell or a low-spec shell, or any other kind of shell. You cannot re-shell period. That is to say, remove the ID from one car shell and put it on another. That's the essence of this proposal, man! |
| |
Team Blitz Ford Capri parts worldwide: Restoration, Road, or Race. Used, Repro, and NOS, ranging from scabby to perfect. Itching your Capri jones since 1979! Buy, sell, trade. www.teamblitz.com blitz@teamblitz.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Theres alot of reading in this thread and not enough pics to keep me that interested but..I personally can't seen how this will lead to more classic car theft as some people have said. Point being, if two cars are being used to create one and the identities of BOTH cars are recorded and/or BOTH shells inspected by someone in authority then surely this will cut out stolen cars being used. A stolen car still has an identity and if a shell didnt have an ID then it couldnt be used, unlike now when all this stuff DOES go on but behind well closed doors. Just my two pence worth, not that it worries me either way.  |
| |
|
|
|
|
