Note:
Since this thread is as worn as my old slippers, I am not going to walk around
the block in them again. I have previously stated my general beliefs about
conversions and fraud. I'll leave the drawing of the "fine" distinction
points to others. Suffice it to say that INTENT is the operating word. I'll
address Doug's questions this one time, which we have all heard from someone
or other many times. In the future, I'll just let the waves roll, and let
others play this out.
Steve
Doug & Rett Leithauser wrote:
>...and what if it was the Tiger VIN plate attached with the original rivets
to
> the original tiger sheet metal and the rest of the body was from an
Alpine.
> Is it now a restored Tiger?
I suppose you mean that the small portion of the top of the firewall,
containing the VIN, was cut from a rust-bucket Tiger, and attached to
an Alpine car. No, I do not believe that the result is still a Tiger, it is a
renamed plated Alpine. I do not believe there is such a thing as a "rebodied
Tiger". This word may apply to an MG, where aftermarket body parts are still
available, but that car was originally an MG, and not something else. An
Alpine is a cousin to the Tiger, but it is not the same car, and is not heir
to the title. It has it's own merits.
> Where is the line between restoration & counterfeit?
Your specific language makes that answer easy. The line is "extent",
"disclosure", and "intent".
> Many (most?) Tigers have been repaired with Alpine sheet metal, are these
"conversions?"
Yes, many have had body panels, fenders, hoods, trunks, doors replaced. The
chassis still came from the TIGER assembly line at JAL.
Once you start replacing the "chassis" (and that would include the firewall,
structural "body", frame structural area (i.e. between the
firewall and the trunk floor, my personal belief is that you are treading on
that "fine line". But that is just my own personal opinion, and that's what
you asked for.
> Is fraud involved?
Fraud is a question of intent to deceive for a profit, so it depends upon what
the "converter" tells a potential buyer. I would believe that a
complete description of all the changes made to the original might suffice to
constitute full disclosure, and eliminate the intent to
defraud. Then the buyer can decide his own value for that car, in comparison
to others.
Disclosure is the law, here in California Real Property (Real Estate). Both
Agents and the Seller are legally required to disclose any material facts. If
it was found that they knew of problems, such as flooding, earth movement,
drainage, hidden damage, etc., and it is later discovered by the new owner,
they are financially liable for damages. If this were true in automobiles, we
would have far less problems.
> Is an Alpine with Tiger engine, suspension, etc still an Alpine? If you
sold it as an Alpine wouldn't that
> be fraud?
It is an Alpine Hot Rod. I believe the buyer, provided "TIGER"
identifications are not present, and Alpine origin is not concealed, will
know that it is not a "Stock" Alpine, and value it according to his own
standards. So if it is sold as a modified Alpine, that is not fraud as there
was no intent to deceive.
> I see lots of questions, but the answers seem to be more personal opinion
than fact.
> Doug Leithauser
As in any question of financial transactions, and disclosures, an awful lot of
opinions, previous practices, intent, historic practice, and
good faith are involved. There is simply no way around this, as it is an art,
not a science. This is also true of the art world, where many "old master's"
works were done by students. In each case the amount differs Even science
has some personal beliefs
attached to what version of reality is correct, amongst all the potential
answers.
I've had at least a dozen "possible causes" of a rocket launch vehicle
"mishap" on my desk. Each had supporting factual evidence for that ball of
fire that billion dollar ball of fire that fell out of the sky. Each was a
firmly held conviction by one or more true experts. All the
facts that could be known were exhaustively examined. In the end, the choice
is to select and defend "the most probable root cause" and
fix it. Just to be safe, all the other "possible causes" are fixed as well,
as they could still cause the next problem.
I do think my personal beliefs are now thoroughly stated. I'll leave the
discussion on "angels on pins", or how thin can you slice a
baloney and still have baloney, to others.
-30-
Steve
--
Steve Laifman < One first kiss, >
B9472289 < one first love, and >
< one first win, is all >
< you get in this life. >
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
_/_/_/_/_/__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/
_/_/_/
|