Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

[Edward M.]

There is an interesting discussing about a 61 Corvette over on CF.

Apparently the car was stolen in 1998, and has now resurfaced and has received an NCRS Top Flight and Bloomington Gold award.

The car was stolen from Oklahoma area in 1998. Insurance paid off the claim. I suspect that the car was subsequently recovered, and then sold by the insurance company, so it would no longer be a stolen car.

The car has been running though the judging process since 2009, and has received an NCRS Top Flight award, and a Bloomington Gold award. Car also received a "Tri-Power" award. Car was recently sold at Barrett Jackson Palm Beach in March of 2015.

Now why is this interesting.

The owner of the car in 1998 states that the car was an original Fuel Injected car. The car was judged and recognized as a 2x4 270 hp car by NCRS and BG.

I know that cars are judged as they present, so if everything was correct for a 270 hp car, it would have judged as such.

What puzzles me about this situation is that this car apparently retained it's original VIN tag throughout this process. I was under the impression that stolen cars were "re-VIN tagged" with a state issued tag.

Is that correct, or is this a state by state and case by case situation?

[Paul D.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

My guess is that it was recovered before the VIN was removed. Unusual situation, but possible. I've known of some later model vehicles recovered with original VIN tag in place and no change was made. Just make sure to have the VIN removed from the stolen vehicle data base. Chip.

[Jim D.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

Unless the VIN tag was removed by the thief, there would be no reason for any state to issue a new one.

[Edward M.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

Unless the VIN tag was removed by the thief, there would be no reason for any state to issue a new one.

Some states issue new VIN tags as a matter of policy for any cars that is stolen. The VIN of the stolen car will be in the database, so a new VIN resolves this issue. I don't know what state the car was "recovered in", but the car was registered in Alabama when it when through the judging process.

[Jim D.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

Some states issue new VIN tags as a matter of policy for any cars that is stolen. The VIN of the stolen car will be in the database, so a new VIN resolves this issue. I don't know what state the car was "recovered in", but the car was registered in Alabama when it when through the judging process.

I never heard of that but I suppose it's possible. Wa. State and none of the other states I've dealt with have that policy. It would be easier to make an addendum in a data base than to issue a new VIN but then the state wouldn't be able to charge you as much in fees.

[Paul D.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

Apparently, law enforcement updates the data base routinely. A local newspaper article this week told of a man that had his work truck stolen but it was recovered within a few days. After he got it back, within the week he was stopped (with much excitement) because the truck was still listed as stolen. The article stated that the law enforcement agency in the state it was recovered had failed to have it removed from the data base. Chip.

[Loren L.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

Press on , Don Q.
There was a time when any collector car processed through Alabama was routinely in question by buyers-in-the-know. Basically because, as I understand it, if you walked into AL MVD(?) with a scrap of paper with a VIN and a recital that you had bought the car, you got a title. If that is
no longer the case, please correct me. If it still the case, Don Q, publish the VIN and remove this scab from the roster.

[Edward M.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

Press on , Don Q.
There was a time when any collector car processed through Alabama was routinely in question by buyers-in-the-know. Basically because, as I understand it, if you walked into AL MVD(?) with a scrap of paper with a VIN and a recital that you had bought the car, you got a title. If that is
no longer the case, please correct me. If it still the case, Don Q, publish the VIN and remove this scab from the roster.

Loren;

You completely lost me with this, but let me try it this way.

Alabama no longer allows you to walk in with a scrap of paper and get a title (or registration). Cars over 35 years old do not get titled in Alabama, so the registration is the proof of ownership.

According to the previous owner, the car was stolen in Oklahoma in 1998. He has a police report to this effect. The insurance company paid the claim to settle the loss, so the previous owner no longer has a legal claim to the car. The previous owner also says that the insurance company told him that the car was never recovered. I don't know what the real story is.

The car was registered in Alabama for many years, and successfully campaigned through NCRS and Bloomington Gold. The car was sold at Barrett Jackson Palm Beach in March of this year.

The car does NOT show up as a stolen car in the National Insurance Crime Bureau VINCheck.

The car is VIN 10867S102676.

The previous owner says he still has some original parts for the car, and that the car was originally a fuel injected car. It is now a 2x4 270 hp car.

The previous owner wants to "settle this situation", but I am not really sure what there is to settle.

[Jerry G.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

Roy Sinor and his dad looked at this car just before it was stolen. I had it in a trailer at a gated secure storage area. i have State Farms file, there was no recovery in their file. It's still a stolen car.

[Edward M.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

Roy Sinor and his dad looked at this car just before it was stolen. I had it in a trailer at a gated secure storage area. i have State Farms file, there was no recovery in their file. It's still a stolen car.

Jerry;

To say it is still a stolen car is a stretch...you don't know that State Farm has told you everything. The car in NOT listed in the NICB, which is where it would be if it was a stolen car.

I would start there, find out why it is not in the NICB.

And keep in mind that you are opening a can or worms that might get ugly, and you have no legal interest in this car.

Just saying...

[Jerry G.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

Car was never recovered, according to State Farm. They have no reason to lie, they sent me file. If it was never recovered it's still stolen and bogus history and options created for this "triple crown" winner.

[Edward M.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

Car was never recovered, according to State Farm. They have no reason to lie, they sent me file. If it was never recovered it's still stolen and bogus history and options created for this "triple crown" winner.

Last time, tread carefully. I suspect that there are a number of innocent people involved in this. Good luck on the search.

[Will B.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

If this was a fuel car, maybe an ultrasound check of the
driver's side area where the original fuelie air cleaner mount
rivets were would reveal something?

My 61 was basically destroyed from the doors forward...
but I brought all the busted parts back in the trunk. Lo and
behold, 46 years later, there was the piece of the inner fender,
with the bracket and two corroded aluminum rivets still attached!!!
Willy

[Philip A.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

Giving everyone the benefit of the doubt regarding what is posted above, and there is too little necessary details to make any certain claims, there is no proof the car was born a fuelie. It is possible that the car was not born a fuelie and post recovery was restored back to its original 2x4 state.

[Peter S.]

Re: Interesting discussion about a "lost" 61

The owner of the car in 1998 states that the car was an original Fuel Injected car. The car was judged and recognized as a 2x4 270 hp car by NCRS and BG.

I know that cars are judged as they present, so if everything was correct for a 270 hp car, it would have judged as such.

Is this a true statement? I recently asked a very similar question at a advanced judging school about adding sidepipes to a '69 and was told that it is judged off of what the car was born with, so even if done correctly (but determined to not be original) it would receive deducts for everything that is side pipe related (adders) and rear exhaust (missing).