67 P-O-P question

[Gene M.]

Re: 67 P-O-P question

I would doubt there is a way to do that without potential legal implications.

If thats the case would not the suggestion in post #12 have the same potential legal implications?

[Ara G.]

Re: 67 P-O-P question

If thats the case would not the suggestion in post #12 have the same potential legal implications?

Gene, I am guessing that what Roy suggests is that we post the VINs so future buyers can review commentaries, concerns, discussions, date ranges etc about the car and due his due diligence on the car before buying - versus putting a VIN of a car on a "counterfeit" list that could have legal ramifications. The former puts some caveat emptor into the future buyer, whereas the latter puts a stamp on the car by someone with or without adequate knowledge/proof that states a fact and could give rise to a suit for a multitude of reasons. Am only guessing though. Regards. ARA

[Roy S.]

Re: 67 P-O-P question

Yea, exactly what he said! If we as a group of hobbyist discuss a car, by VIN, and some individual buying it happens to discover our discussion while researching the car. That seems in my mind to be different than a posted list of counterfeit cars. Gene - I took out an errors and omissions policy on myself years ago, because in this day and time anyone can sue anyone.

If you get named in a lawsuit, it could cost you tens of thousands of dollars just to have your name expunged from it, and if you don't respond lets just say your assumed guilty.

[Gene M.]

Re: 67 P-O-P question

Yea, exactly what he said! If we as a group of hobbyist discuss a car, by VIN, and some individual buying it happens to discover our discussion while researching the car. That seems in my mind to be different than a posted list of counterfeit cars. Gene - I took out an errors and omissions policy on myself years ago, because in this day and time anyone can sue anyone.
If you get named in a lawsuit, it could cost you tens of thousands of dollars just to have your name expunged from it, and if you don't respond lets just say your assumed guilty.

Thank you for clarifications Ara and Roy. A hobby can have a lot of underlying #$@*& because of dishonest people out there that may or may not even be members of our organization. To bad you have to carry insurance just because you have a knowledge of Corvettes and are in a leadership position. It makes me wonder if others in our organization are at risk if they ever disclose anything about a Corvette they do not own.

[Kenneth B.]

Re: 67 P-O-P question

Its all about the money! Sad

[Roy S.]

Re: 67 P-O-P question

To bad you have to carry insurance just because you have a knowledge of Corvettes and are in a leadership position. It makes me wonder if others in our organization are at risk if they ever disclose anything about a Corvette they do not own.

Gene, you should not relate my decision to carry insurance with my involvement in NCRS, they are in my mind unrelated. Even a blind squirrel will find an acorn every now and then, so conversely even an individual trying to perform in an ethical and honest manner could make a mistake. I suspect given some personalities that exist you could even end up in a lawsuit disclosing something about a Corvette you currently own or owned in the past, we are discussing tangible assets that have existed for possibly 50 years or more.

Ken, for some its not about the money, but it can often be perceived as a very fine line. Heck it was about the money for both of us back in I'm going to say 1988 when we stood in the Holiday Inn parking lot, Bloomington, IL you wanted 5K more for your white/blue 1967 435 convertible than I wanted to pay. When two fools met, you for agreeing to sell and pricing your car and me for not buying it.

[Tim G.]

Re: 67 P-O-P question

Liability reasons are why I usually decline looking at a vehicle for someone when they contact me. I figure if a group of judges on the judging field are mystified, who am I to make a judgment alone on a car in someone's garage.

[Kenneth B.]

Re: 67 P-O-P question

Youre right. I did want the ungodly sum of 25,000. LOL

[Michael J.]

Re: 67 P-O-P question

I think it is really sad that '67 L71s have such a dark cloud over them. It seems no one these days trusts any of them due to all the stuff that has gone on around some sales over the last decade or so.

[Tim G.]

Re: 67 P-O-P question

There are some good, original engine and well documented 1967 L71's out there. Some will rise to the top and those cars will always be popular.

[Michael J.]

Re: 67 P-O-P question

There are some good, original engine and well documented 1967 L71's out there. Some will rise to the top and those cars will always be popular.

I agree, but it is not easy to find these, nor to verify beyond a doubt to a skeptical buyer. And there are many NOM L71 cars that are out there and honestly described as such that are under suspicion too, even if they were originally L71s. Not having the original engine is an automatic problem, even when you are honest.