Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Hylton

Pages: [1] 2
1

Okay so if I am understanding you correctly, some reports may include the inspection for rebodying and some may not. It would all depend on what the original customer asked for? And what they had asked for would be clearly documented in the report?

Not that I'd presume to speak for Jerry, or Ed, or anyone else who's gone out on a limb certifying cars as "original" or "real"...
And heck, Hylton, you've been around this edn of the hobby way longer than I, I'm just an unemployed Team Camaro COPO moderator and hopeful master of the next great Camaro site ( http://www.firstgens.com )
Frankly, I'd rather have this discussion there, would bring in more prospective customers..uh uh make that enthusiasts, for the time when I'll have sponsors...

So, I'll only comment on what I've seen.

I've seen several certification reports that were displayed with cars for sale, and included areas that were "whited out"

I've also seen one that described a car in great and glowing detail, but never ever once said it was real.

Sometimes you need to slow down and read what's not written.
Other times what is asked after the fact just wasn't answered.
I've the greatest respect for Jerry, and believe he is a man of great honesty and integrity.

There is nothing you have stated above that I disagree with. I agree that people are BS'ing some of Jerry's certs just like they are BS'ing GM of Canada docs, P-O-P's, Original bill of sales, etc.

If the certification is based on customers criteria then that's fine and my question is answered. Personally, if this is the case, I expect to see that criteria in the report. I don't expect Jerry to have to speak to fraudulent or tampered certs of his. Just looking for how they are granted originally. I just don't know why this is so difficult to have answered.

2

The problem with that attitude, Hylton, is you are talking about a private business transaction, between a professional and the previous owner of that car.
The certification, which has been posted on the internet, means one thing, what it says, the car is a real 1968 Z/28.
I've seen the document, it says no more than that, and I don't know why any keyboad jocky's, including the original poster, would think it says more.


There will also be a report. The report would go into some detail, but these vary, depending on what the CUSTOMER was interested in. As far as I know, the report on this car has not been made public. Again, it belongs only to to the guy who commissioned Jerry to produce it. It doesn't automatically belong to the current owner of the car, and it certainly doesn't belong to us.


Okay so if I am understanding you correctly, some reports may include the inspection for rebodying and some may not. It would all depend on what the original customer asked for? And what they had asked for would be clearly documented in the report?

3
This is going to get ugly pretty quick unless everyone steps back a little.

Lets define a rebody.  How much new (or from another car) can be added to any car before its classified as a rebody?  some people say that as long as the cowl area is from the original car then all is good.  Obviously that definition would be coming from a person that only has the firewall section of their car left.  My own personal feelings are that if there is more of the tub (I don't count bolt on parts, or quarter panels/tail panels) of another car attached to your car, then its a rebody.  The key part is that there is another vehicle involved here.  I don't care if you weld a new floor pan, new inner fenderwells, new rockers, new roof to your car as long as they were not obtained from another car.  but thats my opinion, and to date there have been many different discussions on many different sites about what constitutes a rebody and to date no one can agree.  So lets see if we can do it here.

Maybe we start a new thread to discuss it.


We don't need to re-discuss the definition of what a rebody is Mark. That's actually clouding the issue, not helping things. We simply need a one word response from Jerry. That's it.

If Jerry doesn't like me bringing up the question in a public place, he should just answer it with a YES or a NO (nothing else) and I'll never bring up the topic with his name in it again. In fact, I'll never ask him another question  - EVER!!!

4
Rodent,

I will be back in my shop after 8:30 AM Saturday morning so call me and we'll discuss this car.  410-781-0418

Hylton, you are free to get into this arena and do these inspections too.  Have at it.  You are fast to bash me and this goes back many months ago too.  If you do not like what I do, then call me or approach me at the Camaro nationals and I'll be glad to talk with you one on one about these issues.  Posting all over these boards is all you really want to do.  

Also, remember that you were going to "call me" over a year ago.  In regards to some car or something.  That never happened.  I think that you just like chiming in here.

I was also talking to someone else who knows you quite well in your own back yard.  Jim McClean.  Ring any bells?  He's a very good client of mine and respects what I try to do for the hobby.    

Jerry

So you talked to Jim - big deal.

Bashing? Don't think so - show me one place where I said something negative about you. You need to understand something -

Your certification is used everywhere to validate a car as being the real thing. For that reason alone, you should be willing to explain in full detail what your certification means in a PUBLIC forum, not on a phone or in a PRIVATE one as you are requesting. You are well aware of my concerns and I would appreciate you explaining in plain English, if your inspections include a verification for rebodying or not. That's a yes or no question, not an invitation for you to explain to me how busy you are, what boards you belong to, who your customers are, what court case you are working on or how much work is involved in checking for rebodying. You want to have a conversation with me? Fine - let's have it right here.....

I'll make it simple for you -


Does a car with a your "Certificate of Authenticy" mean that it is not a rebody? YES........or.......NO?

5
jerry could start using (ATOI) which stands for at time of inspection.our quality control people used this alot at our freightliner plant to cover their butts as the trucks came down the line

Sure but if he doesn't state what was or wasn't done ATOI, what's the point?

6
Rodent Jim,

I will be back in the shop on Sat morning to discuss this with you.  Call me then and we'll talk about the car.  

In the long run, if this car was "back halfed", this would not be classified as a rebody.  If it was necessary to save the car, many have done this and quite a few of the ZL1's were back halfed to save the car and history.  If the bulk head of the car is all there with trim tag, vin stamps and front clip, that is the bulk of the car.  A rebody is classified as removing vin numbers, trim tag and installing them on another vingin car body.  Grinding out the stamped vins and installing new stamped vins is reboding a car.  In my professional opinion, this Z28 Camaro would not classify as a rebody.  Everyone needs to take a look at my '67 Z28 Stock Eliminator car on my web site.  That Z28 was just barely a carsus by the time we started going back togehter with it.  Much worse than this '68 Z28!!  And no original engine.  The reason I spent over $100K to restore my '67 Z car and bring it back is because the main part of the car, the bulk head area and stamped vins were still there and that complete area was the original part of the car.  If not, I would have walkled away from that car and bought another 1967 Z28 to run Stock Eliminator.

Like anything else, many will have different opinions on this subject.  I am sharing my opinion here for all to read.  The sale price of this car was very cheap when I went to inspect it.  I think about $12-14K.  A steal at that price IMO.  The inspection was done in a driveway in FL and the main concern to my client was the engine being real and the fact that this car was a real Z28.  It was real as rain.  Do I check every car for being back halfed...........no I don't.  But if this will become a political topic that goes on and on, it will come down to all on-site inspections being done with all cars completely apart and dismantled.  That is not a reality.  

I do the best that I can to provide a service to the hobby.  Anyone is free to call me anytime if they have an issue with services that I provide.  I have shut down many a  bad deal on bogus cars and I have the attorneys to back me up on that.  We have won many cases against the bad guys.  I want all to have a pleasant experience in the hobby.  That's what it's all about to me.    

I should also point out that I have not seen this car is almost a year.  So, I do not know if it's exactly the same as it was when I inspected it.

Jerry

    

Jerry,

I've told you before how to solve these problems - state on your reports what you have NOT verified. If you didn't check for re-bodies, state it. If you didn't check for a car being back halved, state it. We are talking about 2 additional sentences here.

Otherwise, people are going to continue to misinterpret what your certification actually means. Eventually, somebody is going to sue you over this stuff.

<edited per request to clarify - Kurt>

7
General Discussion / Re: barrett jackson las vegas Z-28
« on: November 25, 2008, 08:34:07 PM »

^^^Happens everyday actually. Probably happened with this BJ car. How in law, can the first person in the food chain be held responsible for the actions of the person down the line? He can't. He can be accused to be the person who initially lied/misled but that's how civil law works. I can sue you for slander/libel tomorrow and keep throwing lawyers at you until you run out of money trying to defend yourself. Doesn't mean you really did it. Welcome to the real world.

8
General Discussion / Re: barrett jackson las vegas Z-28
« on: November 25, 2008, 02:47:32 PM »
It may not be a crime as in criminal law, get arrested and go to jail...but it is a civil "crime" so to speak.  Trust me, if someone stamps a partial VIN on an engine that is not original to the car it is in, there is a cause of action and the person who was duped can take the seller to court and will WIN.  I know this FIRST HAND and can vouch to the fact that if you misrepresent an engine as original and you have a re-stamped engine in a car and try to pass it off as a numbers matching engine...you will lose and the penalty will not be small.  Trust me on this.  Jerry was involved in this case and his testimony would have been irrefutable.  God himself could not oppose Jerry when it comes to Camaro certification.

You are referring to fraudulent misrepresentation. The act of stamping numbers on a block is not illegal - it's when you sell it as something it's not that the line gets crossed. If someone sold a car and stated the block was re-stamped, no law has been broken.

9
General Discussion / Re: barrett jackson las vegas Z-28
« on: October 31, 2008, 03:21:57 PM »
Here's my 2 cents.....

1.Jerry - your practice of writing up a preliminary report to allow owners to correct their cars before a final one is a wonderful gesture because it saves people from having to spend money twice. Unfortunately, it opens up the possibly of mis-interpretation as to the actual state of a car if the final report is not used to convey the cars true state. Perhaps in the future, you can consider something as indentified below so that preliminary reports cannot be used in an incorrect way. It would have saved you from all this crap.




Wrong stamps on all three pieces.  Aspect ratio is incorrect r everything.  1's were not used on Sept 68 engine stamings, I's were.  Numbers are all over the place. 

Jerry

2. Perhaps you can actually state more definitive comments as above in final reports so that perspective buyers would be better educated as to the true state of a car.


3. Finally, your reports do not regularily state anything as to the issue of re-body. Stating a trim tag is authentic is not sufficient proof that a car is authentic. You should also consider stating in your report that a car has had it's trim tag removed in the past or not. I know you can determine this without difficulty. Sure some have been removed for legitimate restoration purposes but I would think that you would hold that information as of great importance.


I hope you keep doing what you are doing because you have made an impact to the 1st gen Camaro world. Please just consider updating your process a bit to reflect the current reality of the hobby.

10
General Discussion / Re: barrett jackson las vegas Z-28
« on: October 24, 2008, 02:36:27 PM »
Man, would I love to strip and dip this car!

11
1969 - Orphans / 9N576514 - M21 Tranny is on E-bay
« on: June 25, 2008, 02:14:47 PM »


http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1969-302-Z-28-SS-CAMARO-MUNCIE-M21-4SPD-BBC-SBC-GM_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ33733QQihZ016QQitemZ260255336846QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW


From the auction:

"Here is a 1969 Camaro M21 close ratio muncie 4spd in very nice working condition.check pics and you will see this trans is very nice inside and out.The gears and syncros look to have minimal wear.Just install and add oil.Date code is P9T26B ,Dec 26 1968.VIN # 19N576514 Case # 3925660 tailhousing 3857584 side cover 3884685 and front cone 3915020.Trans would also be correct for a 1969 chevy nova and chevelle.No welded ears or other parts.No broken or chipped teeth.all bolt holes are intact,no stripped threads.If you are looking for the right trans for your 69 camaro this is the one you want so don't let it get away.Know what you are buying before you bid.no reserve so bid to own. "

12
Restoration / Re: Floorpans.....Goodmark? ideas?
« on: November 21, 2007, 06:48:43 PM »
I have on my 69 Z/28. Fit great! Keep in mind that you are doing a convertible so you will have to be very careful when cutting the floors out. Make sure your innner and outer rockers are solid before doing the floor or you will end up with your car folded in two as soon as you open a door.

13
Decoding/Numbers / 1967 Protecto-plate
« on: November 16, 2007, 06:26:21 PM »
Were 67 Camaro Protecto-plates identical to the 69's or were some made from plastic? Someone gave me a 67 user manual with a plastic Protecto-plate stuck to it. It was for a Canadian car (not that it should matter).

14
General Discussion / Re: Sad but true
« on: November 09, 2007, 02:27:30 PM »
At this point Gary, what I have is only heresay and I do not want to start false rumors but I will say that I am currently working on a proposal to a very senior executive at GM about a different approach to finding possible information. I have never worked for GM in any way but I do have someone's ear.

15
General Discussion / Re: Sad but true
« on: November 09, 2007, 04:20:08 AM »
There is no "issue with GM"; the documents simply don't exist.

I believe otherwise.

Believe as you will. I was there, and I know all three groups very well that were charged with the three separate internal searches chartered (and funded) by Jim Perkins (Chevrolet General Manager) for the 60's Chevrolet production records.


Maybe you should have looked to see what Fisher still had instead of Chevrolet.

Pages: [1] 2
anything