See comments within your reply.
----- Original Message -----
From: "DrMayf" <drmayf@teknett.com>
To: "Kathy and Erich Coiner" <kathy.coiner@gte.net>; <DJoh797014@aol.com>
Cc: <tigers@autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 8:10 AM
Subject: Re: Alpine Conversion
> Well, not being a lawyer...
> but what you are mentioning is the process used to TAC a car. The lawsuit
> would probably be against a person who used the process errantly or
> knowingly to defraud someone. Say for instance, that an inspector found a
> really good tiger but decided that it was an Alger in order to try and
> purchase it very cheaply.
First it takes 3 inspectors to agree the car is a Tiger and put a sticker
on the car. That will reduce the likely hood of your scenario quite a bit.
Second, the owner of the car comes to TAC to have it inspected. TAC does not
go out and look at cars unsolicited.
Or get it sold to a friend at a really reduced
> price. Or that the inspector had a case of rash with the owner and told
him
> the car was not real. This is a case where both the inspector and the
> underwriting agency could both be found guilty because of the inspectors
> actions and the lack of monitoring by the agency who does the inspections.
Again the system in place requires 3 people to conspire together to make
this happen.
> There are many ways for someone to skin a cat. As far as I am concerned. I
> have had mine since 1967 and it has not been TAC'd and I consider it a non
> event or action. SHould i sell my car and have the buyer tell me it is not
a
> Tiger because it has not been TAC'd then I might consider suit againt the
> organization for failing to disclose that they are not the authority nor
any
> kind of governing body.
>
> just my 2 cents worth, and who cares anyway..
You did enough to reply :)
|