While visiting the Chevy Vette Fest last week-end, I was discussing the motor in a mid year that was for sale. The owner told me about the "original" engine it had and then he saw the NCRS on my shirt. He then said "Well it isn't original to you guys." Proof yet again buyer beware. Don H.
-
-
Re: "You Guys . . . NCRS"
Depends on your perspective - could also be interpreted as proof of all the great deals "you guys" miss out on w/ your microscopic pad criteria. But I ain't complainin' -
Re: "You Guys . . . NCRS"
False advertising is still a crime where I come from. If a little knowledge will prevent a false claim from being made we all win.Bill Clupper #618Comment
-
Re: "You Guys . . . NCRS"
I agree with you. Regards, TerryComment
-
Re: "You Guys . . . NCRS"
Sure in a general context false advertising is not kosher. But where you come claims of original engines is indeed something that lands a private used car seller in the clinker and your AG prosecutes for such claims of used cars offered for sale?
Out of curiosity what if a seller claimed the engine was NOT original, he priced it accordingly and you saw that his claim was erroneous and thus false and that in fact he was trying to stiff someone with an original. Would you ALSO be pronouncing "False advertising" is a crime?
I couldn't agree more about knowledge particularly in used auto sales involving private parties. Those NCRS rejects can make great deals for some folks given a little knowledge and shrewd dealmaking. Yes, everybody wins ideally given enough equitable distribution of knowledge.Comment
-
Re: "You Guys . . . NCRS"
------Another lame arguement from Todd H..........Bill SComment
-
Is "lame" the best ya got Bill?
------Another lame arguement from Todd H..........Bill S
Cute. What is noteworthy is your failure to even so much as ATTEMPT to addresses the Corvette related issue posed. What would you call that?
Oh do tell us you can do better than this Bill. Please.Comment
-
Re: "You Guys . . . NCRS"
I would have to say that an owner representing a car to a buyer as "original engine" who recants that statement when he determines a prospective buyer is capable of verifying this for himself has essentially admitted to attempted Fraud. The legal view of this is less serious if the seller is an individual rather than a Dealer, as at least in some states, the Dealer is held to be an "expert" in the eyes of the law. I was a bystander in a nasty lawsuit about 15 years or so ago regarding a '65 Fuel car" at Bloomington.Bill Clupper #618Comment
-
Re: Is "lame" the best ya got Bill?
ToddH,
------You know,Todd,your right.I didnt understand the first post in ths thread.Then I understood yours even less.It made absolutely no sense to me then and still doesnt.But even with that said,my post was a cheap shot,and Im going to stop.Despite some remarks I have made in your direction I usually come to this board to try to help and often to learn something.Its apparent that you bring out the worst in my two typing fingers,so I wont let myself be drawn in again........Bill SComment
-
Re: "You Guys . . . NCRS"
You are quite right about the dealer vs individual scenario. On occasion AGs will go after dealers.
A lawsuit suggests a civil matter not a criminal one.
I think the 'sudden recant' is indeed telling. It's suggestive and tantalizing but then again we don't know the full story. Of course he could also believe or know it to be original and is also aware that some in NCRS will insist upon certain nuances of the pad and such. The lack of such nuances does not constitute proof that an engine is not original of course. But for some NCRS types - it might as well be the same thing. A redecked engine otherwise correctly configured for the car that was restamped - all we know is that the pad area is NOT in original, un-restored condition.Comment
-
That's MUUUUUUCH better Bill
Good one Bill S,
Let's see you kinda sorta almost apologize as an act of contrition or at least come reeeeal close (picture my thumb and index finger about 1mm apart) in admitting the cheap shot. It was not only cheap it was, to borrow a term, uh, lame.
Then you go on to infer or imply conversely that I have nothing to do w/ learning or helping. And then, and this is the beaut, you actually suggest it's MY fault that you 'shoot cheap shots' in my direction - as if I actually sit around and make such contrivances just to bring this out in you. To be absolutely honest Bill - until this most excellent post in it's subtleness - I never knew who you were or took note of the name & connected it to previous cheap shots.
All in all - very nicely done Bill S - a quick casual scan by a reader might suggest you, being the 'good guy' you are, are genuinely contrite - yet you managed to sneak a much more subtle dig or two in that one. Good show dude! Good show.Comment
-
Re: That's MUUUUUUCH better Bill
ToddH,
-------Please dont misunderstand.There was no apology in there anywhere..........Bill SComment
-
Of course not...
Don't be silly - of course there wasn't - just the nifty note of contrition w/ your 'yeah it was a cheap shot' was all that was needed to couch a few more digs. Again, nice job dude.Comment
-
Re: Is "lame" the best ya got Bill?
Bill,
You are not the only one confused by this thread. I do not know which post is more confusing, the one that says we are missing out on some good deals by not knowing that the "original" engine really is not, or the premiss that a seller would intentionally misrepresent a car in order to get less money from the buyer! As for the seller, he was without a doubt, attempting to defraud a buyer. There are plenty of discriptions he could have used, "numbers matching", "correct numbers", "correct block", ect. We have all heard these terms many times and know that they usually mean something other than original.
When the seller stated the engine was original, he was attempting to get more money out of the car by misrepresenting the originality of the car. The fact that he backtracked on his statement as soon as he saw the NCRS shirt, confirmed that his actions were intentional. He in essence said "I will lie to you unless I think you might catch me lying!" I have never been a big fan of the disproportionate attention that engine stamps and trim tags get in the flight judging process, but restoring a pad for judging and knowingly representing that pad as original to a buyer, are two entirely different things.
Regards, John McGrawComment
-
Lack of evidence
There are plenty of discriptions he could have used, "numbers matching", "correct numbers", "correct block", ect. We have all heard these terms many times and know that they usually mean something other than original.
You presume that people in casual conversations make such subtle distinctions - do you have proof that the seller indeed is capable of such distinctions? You ASSUME he is familiar w/ these terms - you need to prove that such terms are indeed a standard lexicon of the used automobile world and not just the NCRS Corvette world. If the original block were decked and stamped - he is ethically and legally entitled to use the term original engine. You can scream and hollar about the pad all you want - it does not prove teh engine is original or not one way or the other if it's simply been redecked.
by misrepresenting the originality of the car.
Do you have proof he was mis-representing it? Again you presume the NCRS standard for pads is the universal standard for the world. Is it?
The fact that he backtracked on his statement as soon as he saw the NCRS shirt, confirmed that his actions were intentional. He in essence said "I will lie to you unless I think you might catch me lying!"
You have made several leaps that disallow this as a logical argument. If the original engine were decked and restamped - that would largely make it a fake to many an NCRSer. He may have been aware of it and simply wasn't going to waste his time trying to validate it to such a person who lives and dies by the pad almost exclusively.
but restoring a pad for judging and knowingly representing that pad as original to a buyer
He said the engine was original - NOT the pad. He saw the shirt and for all you know figured that anyone wearing such a shirt is only interested in pads and not engines and figured what was the point...
John you and others sit here and pass judgment on complete strangers w/o knowing the facts nor realizing that to some people the pad is not the ultimate end all of life as we know it. NCRS myopic view that the pad is everything is only NCRS' and not a monopoly. Before passing judgement on strangers as fraudulent hucksters - validate the facts, fill in the missing pictures and offer fully constructed logical arguments to support your conclusions. What happened to concept of presumed innocence?
The difference between you and me is that I admit I don't know all the facts and therefore don't go around handing out accusations of fraud to complete strangers based on a post to an internet bulletin board.Comment
Comment