rsinor

If the car was a theft recovery, when it was recovered, the original VIN was known and recorded in records. Assuming the original VIN plate was missing the assigned VIN would have been issued and became GAxxxx in GA where new records were issued for GAxxxx, it would not take rocket science to uncover that information, thus giving the original VIN as built. Apparently someone decided to put the number back on the vehicle, the body trim tag would identify build sequence and can confirm or deny it is consistent with the original number. Anything that got replaced engine, trans, frame, etc., with the original VIN would be extremely hard to detect to a non-knowing eye thus it could prove authenticity of the original VIN. Point is there is/was a record of the GAxxxx number and what the original VIN was when recovered. Any title issued after theft recovery would have had the GAxxxx number not the original VIN. Someone put a non GM VIN plate on the car matching the original VIN.

ifitgoesfast

If you bought and sold Corvettes for a living, would you notice the GAxxxx Georgia sequence on the rebuilt title looks nothing like a typical C2 GM VIN #?

My whole problem with this story is that the owner claims he had no idea it was a recovered once stolen vehicle. I've only owned one Corvette, but if I had seen this, I would know I needed to do some homework. Especially if I bought it from an auto body collision center.

We don't know who stamped/forged the original VIN # onto a fake metal plate (crime), since with each title transfer, the state DMV does not physically see the vehicle, but handles the paper only recording. So why a knee jerk reaction and put someone in jail who might or might not have done it?

rsinor

Agreed! But the current owner had a title and car with VIN plate that matched. The match was for a production corvette VIN, the one that had become GAxxxx. He owned a car with no GAxxxx on the title or VIN. Someone else saw to that.

I would suspect in the investigation they know when the title and car VIN were changed.

That is my take on it, the Gaxxxx stuff appears to have surfaced or come to light during the investigation.

ifitgoesfast

This is where we disagree. You say the GM VIN # is the only one on the title. I say the Georgia # is on the title.

Given the laws being the same in Georgia and New York on the rebuilt title matter, that Georgia # cannot be removed. So how would an original GM VIN # get on a title of a vehicle recorded in the states as a stolen/recovered vehicle and not include the state ID #? Even if we imagined someone put the fake metal GM VIN plate on goes to the state and says, hey I want a salvage title, then applies for a rebuilt title, the DMV checks the number. I don't see a way around it. Unless the title is a fake, would be the only way to get a title with original GM VIN # rather than the recovered state ID #.

Then the question is, who put the fake VIN plate on, the auto body collision center, or the professional restorer, or someone else from the past, since the DMV never looks at the actual car?

hope2

There is ONE VIN # on a title, never two. Someone trashed the GA VIN title and got a new title with the alleged GM VIN #. Simple to do if you know how. This person bought this car with GM VIN #. Therefore he would not have a reason to suspect clouded history. Again, this is not a rebuilt title, which is a "branded" title, and totally different.

rsinor

Have you seen the title? I was told it carried only the 1966 VIN which matched the fraudulent VIN plate by someone that has seen the title.

JohnZ

We don't know what VIN was on the title.

Rich Yanulis

hope2

From the charges levied against Ellis. it would cause one to believe the GM VIN # was on the title. If he sold the car with the correct title, would be a civil matter, and it is not.

rsinor

Unless I am mistaken, NCRS would not have accepted the vehicle for judging if the title did not match the VIN plate. I could be wrong but that is my understanding. So that kind of indicates they matched and it got at least to the judging field.

hope2

" NCRS does not consider the restoration or replacement of components as counterfeit as long as the intent is to restore the car to its former or original state as it left the factory. "

JohnZ

The title doesn't need to be presented - only the registration. The car was disqualified because of the obviously fake VIN plate.

hope2

believe you quoted the wrong poster here, but the registration should match the title, no? flamed01 has a valid point.

Thomas66

Now I get it. I thought that the title had gone from mfg VIN to GA # and back to mfg VIN again.

MiguelsC2

You can sue anybody for anything. And most lawyers do just that!

The buyer will only recover the difference in value. And he will have to prove that in court. Good luck.

This all to force the seller into an out of court settlement. Or to break him trying to defend himself.

I am not fond of MOST lawyers. I am even less fond of people who sue at the drop of a hat.

TORT REFORM!!!

1snake

And that's what will tell the whole story.

When new, it had a Chev. VIN on the title. When it was recovered from the theft, it was issued a Ga. state VIN on the title. If it still has the Ga. VIN, the current owner is S.O.L. and nothing more than a whiner. If it has a Chev. VIN, it will be easy to trace when and who had it changed and that person is screwed.


My favorite joke: What's the difference between a lawyer and a catfish? One is a scum eating bottom feeder, the other is a fish.

Jim

rsinor

My bet is that is why multiple counts of felony charges were filed.

1snake

However, the current owner acknowledged that it had a Ga. VIN tag on it.

Jim

Rich Yanulis

I agree...........
The way I see it, 1snake's statement is dead on

4 Speed Dave

All this over a god damn 5 dollar trophy or certificate. What do you bet this guy got picked on in the school yard as a kid. I also believe that he is playing the "poor old me: card in all this.