I'm pretty sure this is illegal.

[abiddle]

https://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/cto/6053000275.html

Need vin and title for 1969 Camaro - $1 (Lobelville) 

[69Z28-RS]

It's illegal to remove another manufacturer's VIN plate (GM's in this case) and apply it to another vehicle (in this case, a homebuilt camaro look-alike)...

I sent them a message:
"You have a 'homebuilt' car; apply to your state for a state issued VIN, OR make up your own VIN and stamp it on all the parts and use that number to register it.
Note:  IT IS ILLEGAL to remove another manufacturer's VIN plate from a car they built and apply it to a different vehicle!!!"

Maybe if we all send them a similar message, they MIGHT get the hint, at least they won't be able to plead ignorance of the law.

[L78 steve]

They wont care.

[bertfam]

The only thing you can do is click on the "Prohibited" icon. If enough people do it, the ad will come down.

Ed

[1968RSZ28]

The only thing you can do is click on the "Prohibited" icon. If enough people do it, the ad will come down.

Ed

Done!

Paul

[BULLITT65]

I thought replacing a body with a dynacorn body was legal?
This guy just decided to start with the replacement body and work backwards towards the VIN.

Lets say somebody calls him and says, "hey I have a rusted out 69 shell, you can have it and the vin/trim tag, and title for $500"

What is the difference, between that and the green 69Z, that sold and had a re-body, (other than they started with a Vin on the green car)?

[jdv69z]

The whole thing is kind of fuzzy, isn't it.

[KurtS]

In the hobby, most don't think it's acceptable.
But it is commonly done to repair vehicles, especially those with frames. Jeeps rust out and people replace with a new tub - it is a repair part.

[1968RSZ28]

3-21-17: "This posting has been deleted by its author."

Paul

[69Z28-RS]

In the hobby, most don't think it's acceptable.
But it is commonly done to repair vehicles, especially those with frames. Jeeps rust out and people replace with a new tub - it is a repair part.

There's only ONE reason to move a VIN from a GM produced body to a 'Dynacorn' body, and that is to Defraud a potential buyer.  There's nothing illegal about procuring a complete body, frame, etc and building your own car (but it's NOT a GM produced car).   Each state has a procedure for obtaining a vehicle id number for your car, but moving a GM VIN plate from one car to another is definitely illegal, even if you can 'get by with it'...  it's still illegal and there's only ONE reason to do it..  to FOOL (meaning to Defraud) a buyer or observer of the car.

[KurtS]

I would not agree with that statement. Some states would consider the new body as a replacement part.
Not saying it's right or wrong, but I talked with an inspector the other day about this and he said as long as you have a receipt for the body....

[69Z28-RS]

GM stamped the BODY of the car with the VIN, not the frame (subframe car).. What do you think GM would think of transferring one of their VIN plates to a japanese made body??

Noted that it's can be a small 'jump' from replacing all the metal attached to the original firewall (which would be a *repair*) to replacing an entire body, but replacing an entire body (NOT a GM body) sends the argument over the cliff IMO...

In MOST states, if you have a body damaged to the extent that it's *totaled* (normally due to collision, but what's the difference whether rusted or crunched?).. the states require that the VIN plate be removed, and once the car is repaired to their satisfaction, a 'state issued' VIN plate is provided by the state.  This is a requirement on state licensed businesses... insurance companies, collision shops, etc), although obviously if you owned the 'damaged' car and buy a replacement body... then you could pretty easily circumvent the law...  but Regardless, IMO..  it's an attempt to defraud given that one does have the replacement VIN option...

[69Z28-RS]

I would not agree with that statement. Some states would consider the new body as a replacement part.
Not saying it's right or wrong, but I talked with an inspector the other day about this and he said as long as you have a receipt for the body....

You are saying that an employee of a STATE told you it was OK if you transferred the VIN from one car body to another?   What state?  and what state agency told you this?

[BULLITT65]

Have to agree

In the hobby, most don't think it's acceptable.
But it is commonly done to repair vehicles, especially those with frames. Jeeps rust out and people replace with a new tub - it is a repair part.

There's only ONE reason to move a VIN from a GM produced body to a 'Dynacorn' body, and that is to Defraud a potential buyer.  There's nothing illegal about procuring a complete body, frame, etc and building your own car (but it's NOT a GM produced car).   Each state has a procedure for obtaining a vehicle id number for your car, but moving a GM VIN plate from one car to another is definitely illegal, even if you can 'get by with it'...  it's still illegal and there's only ONE reason to do it..  to FOOL (meaning to Defraud) a buyer or observer of the car.

I would say for the collector, it depends on what the normal practice is with the particular body/car in question. I am aware in the Jeep world that this is done on a regular basis. The vehicles were used hard and then put away wet, (with mud,sand,dirt in every orifice to hold water).

It is not frowned upon, and I have seen where it is a selling point having replaced "the tub" already. Also 32 fords. For years and years and years guys have replaced original ford steel with fiberglass bodies, and they are still titled as a 32 ford. Even easier with the new metal ford 32 bodies. Not frowned upon, but some guys want original here ford steel, other guys its not a big deal.

[Sauron327]

A Dynacorn body is Licensed by GM so it is a replacement body part. I've worked in the collision industry and transferring a VIN to a new cab was not unusual and perfectly legal. Procedures vary by state so one must follow them.

[HawkX66]

Going through the process to tag a "kit" build process is a pain in a lot of states. Especially Mass. You would have to have receipts for every last piece of the build and take it to an inspection station where you run the risk of getting it seized if the inspector doesn't like something. I think in a lot of cases it's just the easy thing to do for someone building. "Hey, I already have a title for this VIN. Why should I give more money to the state and spend a bunch of time to have the state apply a new #?"
Haven't done it myself and no plans to. Just saying...

[69Z28-RS]

A Dynacorn body is Licensed by GM so it is a replacement body part. I've worked in the collision industry and transferring a VIN to a new cab was not unusual and perfectly legal. Procedures vary by state so one must follow them.

So what is the process for your state that you 'follow' .. when moving a VIN from a Camaro body to a totally new (Dynacorn) body?

IMO, this process some of you are espousing *totally* obscures/obliterates the purpose and meaning of a VIN!   *shaking my head*.  I would LOVE to see an official statement from a GM high level representative (or GM lawyer) that approves of this!  (but it would be doomsday for our hobby)... 

[Sauron327]

So what is the process for your state that you 'follow' .. when moving a VIN from a Camaro body to a totally new (Dynacorn) body?

IMO, this process some of you are espousing *totally* obscures/obliterates the purpose and meaning of a VIN!   *shaking my head*.  I would LOVE to see an official statement from a GM high level representative (or GM lawyer) that approves of this!  (but it would be doomsday for our hobby)... 

I never transferred a VIN to a Dcorn body so I had no reason to check. Dcorn bodies are not plug and play as many think, so one is usually better off repairing the original shell. Anyone who does restorations for a living knows how many modifications are required on reproduction panels. Bodies are no different. It is easy to just buy a completed lower chassis from Muscle Car Metal and simply put your top half on provided it is solid.

Shops buy new cabs for trucks and transfer VINs. Not sure what the big deal is. No sense in junking a $60K truck when it needs a simple cab swap.

[HawkX66]

A Dynacorn body is Licensed by GM so it is a replacement body part. I've worked in the collision industry and transferring a VIN to a new cab was not unusual and perfectly legal. Procedures vary by state so one must follow them.

So what is the process for your state that you 'follow' .. when moving a VIN from a Camaro body to a totally new (Dynacorn) body?

IMO, this process some of you are espousing *totally* obscures/obliterates the purpose and meaning of a VIN!   *shaking my head*.  I would LOVE to see an official statement from a GM high level representative (or GM lawyer) that approves of this!  (but it would be doomsday for our hobby)... 

I know it varies from state to state and has been discussed at length, but I think to transfer a VIN at a body shop just requires documenting it. I don't think they need to report to anyone.
As far as doomsday etc., I can't agree. I don't live and die by what some lawyer's opinion is and I sure don't live by what some politician decides that has no idea what he's talking about and probably has never picked up a wrench. I don't like the nanny state mentality. I'm not saying that's you Gary, but it's a slippery slope.
There's always going to be fraud in everything that has value attached to it. You just have to be better at completing your due diligence.

[Sauron327]

Another example of many is a body tech stated the DMV rep came to the shop and handed him the rivets, witnessed the swap and then signed off on it.

[69Z28-RS]

you guys seem to be saying that the old 'Repair' OR Replace..   is all the same now..  that replacement is the same as Repair.  I will never go along with that personally.

When a manufacturer puts his 'plate' on his product, that manufacturer is saying to the customer base.. 'I built this...  I'm proud of it..  and I want everyone to know who built it'....    That has always been the way I've thought of it, and what I believe that GM USED to believe about their products...

If your philosophies became 'common practice', then the manufacturer's plate would mean NOTHING!   and that would be a sad day in the US...

[Sauron327]

you guys seem to be saying that the old 'Repair' OR Replace..   is all the same now..  that replacement is the same as Repair.  I will never go along with that personally.

When a manufacturer puts his 'plate' on his product, that manufacturer is saying to the customer base.. 'I built this...  I'm proud of it..  and I want everyone to know who built it'....    That has always been the way I've thought of it, and what I believe that GM USED to believe about their products...

If your philosophies became 'common practice', then the manufacturer's plate would mean NOTHING!   and that would be a sad day in the US...

It is common practice today, as you can buy OEM parts in collision. If you had industry experience you would know this. Your new car repair option also offers aftermarket parts when involved in a hit.

Most classics today with original drivetrains are built with some aftermarket sheetmetal or other parts and they command very good money if well done. Those that do like them can buy only 100% survivors and think the others that can be rebuilt should be destroyed. The well known, rebuilt Hemi Cuda, which is worth far more than any 69 Z is not being tossed out of the owner's corral. Other hand built cars fall into the same category; there were no factory replacement parts. Camaros do not sit as high on the food chain as some owners may think.

[69Z28-RS]

Sauron,

I'm not referring to just Camaros, OR just cars..  I'm referring to everything that carries a manufacturer's plate (which is almost every thing we buy).

You seem to be defending 'repair parts' being aftermarket.  I'm not a fan of most aftermarket  parts/items, BUT.. you're missing my point... and that is..  REPLACEMENT of an entire entity (that carries a manufacturer's plate) IS NOT repair.  it is REPLACEMENT, and putting the original items mfg's plate on it is what I'm dissing here...

If the replacement parts aren't *crap*, they will have their own manufacturer's mark/plate on them, and NOT try fooling people by applying, or encouraging others to apply, an original maker's plate.   As I said originally, for anyone replacing the ENTIRE BODY (and not repairing one) but then move the mfg plate to the 'bastard' body, then their only purpose can be fraud...

[ZLP955]

There will always be differing opinions on this subject in the hobby.....

[HawkX66]

There will always be differing opinions on this subject in the hobby.....

Nothing wrong with discussing those differing opinions though...

[cook_dw]

[BSMIT59]

And as grown adults we should respect all of those opinions even when we disagree with them. I personally believe that Gary is making a very good point on the POTENTIAL for someone to defraud an individual on the purchase of something that it is not. Taking for example most of you on here will whole - heartedly agree taking a "plain Jane" and slapping Z-28 badging on it has been attempted too many times to count, and many of those efforts were done to defraud to potential buyer into believing that they were getting something that was not really what the badging showed. And even now the current wave of reproduction "Original Window Sticker and POP".  Long story short these cars are getting more scarce by the day and if you are lucky enough to own one, you should cherish it for what it is and means to you personally and not give 2 hoots about anyone's opinion!!!  All I got to say about that right now.

[HawkX66]

you guys seem to be saying that the old 'Repair' OR Replace..   is all the same now..  that replacement is the same as Repair.  I will never go along with that personally.

When a manufacturer puts his 'plate' on his product, that manufacturer is saying to the customer base.. 'I built this...  I'm proud of it..  and I want everyone to know who built it'....    That has always been the way I've thought of it, and what I believe that GM USED to believe about their products...

If your philosophies became 'common practice', then the manufacturer's plate would mean NOTHING!   and that would be a sad day in the US...

I'm not saying repair or replace is the same thing, but where is the line drawn? I think that ends up being the question. You repair a fender when you patch it. You've replaced it when you put a full new fender on. I think we can agree that a Dynacorn etc is a replacement, but replacing a fender or a quarter is a repair.
I've seen plenty of guys replace a floor, 1/4s, roof, trunk, & firewall. Repair or replacement? In my opinion, as long as the skeletal structure that all the parts are welded to remains, it's a repair. A major repair, but a repair. I admit, that's a pretty grey area though. I just can't run my life around thieves and con artists etc. I just do my best to stay knowledgeable enough to not get taken by them, though it's happened a time or two. It goes right along with the 2nd Amendment. People want to create a ton of laws impeding on the 2A all because of small population percentage of criminals. Creating a new law won't change a thing. Only law abiding citizens obey the law.

[ZLP955]

Nothing wrong with discussing those differing opinions though...

Agreed, but re-stating the same opinion again and again isn't really a discussion, it's trying to win an argument. Express viewpoint and move on.
And BTW this isn't aimed at anyone in particular.

[Mark]

Technically the dynacorn body is a repair part.  It was never part of a GM manufactured vehicle and never had a VIN of its own.  It is a replacement for a failed component, either thru rust or damage.  It is a very fine line but legally its no different than a replacement fender in the grand scheme of things.  It is totally illegal to swap a VIN from one GM manufactured body that had a VIN assigned for your damaged GM manufactured body because both were originally part of a complete vehicle built by GM in compliance with the regulations of the day.  Not saying it is right or wrong, just that it can be done without going to jail.  Does it affect the value of said repaired vehicle when your done? You bet it does and it should be disclosed but probably isn't most times.

[Mike S]

 Ya know....after reading these replies and realizing how far changes can be done before crossing that gray area brought to mind how this practice exists in other areas. Where I live, if a builder wants to put a new structure on property that has an existing structure, if they tear down the structure but leave up only one original wall, the the new replacement structure is considered a 'restoration'. This prevents the need for filing for additional permits, paperwork and variances that a totally new building would require. The same when I had my in-ground pool 'restored' last year. I left one original part of the support structure intact and an entire new pool was built around it and I avoided having to file for permits and variances (the pool was grandfathered in the 80's when local zoning changed). This work too was considered a 'restoration'. If I had removed the entire structure then it would be considered new construction, so leaving an original part intact made it a 'restoration'. Sound familiar?

Mike

[camaronut]

Even-though my better sense tells me different, I've gotta open my mouth on this one.....so here we go.

I have a friend who has a 69 Z, all numbers match bleh bleh bleh........

When he bought the car, it was virtually a pretzel. There wasn't a straight panel anywhere on this car. Everything was either bent or twisted....even the firewall and dash were bent like a "V".  The car was involved in a unfair meeting with a huge tree on the drivers-side - inward.  Don't ask about the driver....it wasn't good.

He asked me and a few of us Camaro guys, who know the cars and what it takes to restore them.  We told him to walk away, unless you thinking of doing a rebody.  Nope.....he was going to save this car.  We knew he was in trouble...but he wouldn't listen.

Well, 3 body shops and $60K later, he has a body that is still not right, nothing lines up. For example we tried installing the rear window.  No luck.  The sill that the window rests against was about 1/2" off all around the perimeter.  I never saw a grown man cry over a restoration...but he has finally called it quits and now has nothing to show for $60K.  Every panel on this car was replaced with either Dynacorn or AMD ( I know....not a good idea) metal.  This car is a confabulation of new metal.  The only thing original is the firewall.

He now admits that he should have walked away, and kept looking.  Thankfully he has a VERY understanding wife.

So now, he's saving up the money to buy a full body kit and hopefully get things rolling again on his restoration (which is now a replacement).

I get the reason why he wanted to save this car.  He wanted to do the right thing, but got stung badly by restorations shops that had no clue.

Now, I'm not advocating using these Dynacorn bodies (I'm not a big fan of it - it's an option), but TO ME, you have to draw the line between what is / isn't sensible.

[abiddle]

This Ad wasn't an attempt to repair or replace a specific car's body using the original VIN, this isn't an example of bringing a specific VIN back to life by rebodying it.

This is after-the-fact request for a VIN and title. "Need vin and title for 1969 Camaro"

I can see having a specfic VIN and attempting to rebuild that camaro, even when everything needs to be replaced. But this is the reverse of that situation. I agree and understand the first, I don't agree with the this.

[lynnbilodeau]

This Ad wasn't an attempt to repair or replace a specific car's body using the original VIN, this isn't an example of bringing a specific VIN back to life by rebodying it.

This is after-the-fact request for a VIN and title. "Need vin and title for 1969 Camaro"

I can see having a specfic VIN and attempting to rebuild that camaro, even when everything needs to be replaced. But this is the reverse of that situation. I agree and understand the first, I don't agree with the this.

You are correct.   Selling a title and vin plate from a destroyed car is illegal.

The other scenarios vary by state.  You can build a dynacorn bodied car in Oklahoma, but it gets a state issued vin.

[bcmiller]

You are correct.   Selling a title and vin plate from a destroyed car is illegal.

The other scenarios vary by state.  You can build a dynacorn bodied car in Oklahoma, but it gets a state issued vin.

I wish there was a national policy on this, following Oklahoma's lead.