ZZ2 - What's REAL, What's NOT .... or MAYBE!

[Dan Rear]

A very lucid point DW, by your standards!! We just need to work on the typing skills now don't we...

[Steve Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by Dan Rear

A very lucid point DW, by your standards!! We just need to work on the typing skills now don't we...

Thin ice Dan, thin ice!

[driftwood]

i have not been drinking and doddery i am not!

[Dr. Alexander Lienau]

Would it not be much better, if the people who have no personell interest (because they have no car and are not member of a comittee or dealer etc.) but might have much knowledge (what not every car owner might have) tell us concrete chassis Number for Chassis number what they know before they accuse somebody else like me or Helen Malkie to hide something. I understand for example 100 % that Helen protects her archive against missuse by people who only try to worked out, where might be a loophole to bring in a new car as genuine article. I addition the Malkies are obliged to keep the information, which they may get by their customers secret. The customers themselfes only can authorize Helen or Vin to give any information concerning their cars to the public.

[driftwood]

1 reason why people will not want all the info in the public domain is that they will be found out and with regards to Helen she will not want to be the person giving the info and then we proove the car owner has a fake car ie a crashed written off car that was rebuilt in 1984 or 95
I can walk you down the pit lane and show you the cars that are not the real McCoy and the race report of the crash and the fact the car never races again for the next 4 years yet appears by miracle 10-15 years later and guess what it is all shiney with many new parts

[Dr. Alexander Lienau]

I am not an expert as a tax lawyer.

Everybody is absolutely free to print numbers on chassis what ever he likes. It is getting more complicate, if he prints chassis plates with numbers for his private pleasure. It gets much more complicate, when he is saying that the chevron Company did it, because a chassis number is "a document showing an author" in the german law producing false documents is criminal.

If I take the owner of the other car to a german court, I will loose the case for 100 % sure and I think the judge made it right. The judge will tell me that I am absolutely not involved in the "other" car as long as I can proove I have the right car. When I cannot proove that I am the owner of the one and only genuine car, I will loose the case as well.

What do we learn from that example.

As the owner of the genuine car your are not protected by law, you have to protect your car (and at the end your money) yourself by having all the documentation as perfect as possible. If you buy a Chevron B19 you can ask the seller for the complete history going back say to the early seventies. If the seller can not supply you with that history you decide to buy or not to buy or you get a discount. If you get the discount than you at risk and if your are honest to yourself, you know that your car may be is not the genuine article.

In reality the people take the discount and later try to find somebody less experienced, sell him the car as the genuine article for a higher price. Bad luck for the unexperienced buyer if he forgot to ask for a guarantee.

The other thing is to protect the market. If the market is of potential buyers is as much experienced as possible, you can only very well documented cars to a high price.

[Andrew Fellowes]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

Are they happy? I don't know of an original chassis being separated from a car and then getting an HC.

I think it depends when it happened.
The following is hypothetical for the basis of discussion;

An FJ became two cars in the mid sixties.
The complication arises in that the second car never competed in Formula Junior (but its chassis did as the first car). So what group does it now race with?
Twist that a bit more and the car with the continuous history actually was given a slightly later chassis that also never ran in FJ.

If one was to apply CAMS rules to the letter, neither should run as Formula Juniors. One has the wrong chassis type (just), the other never ran in period.

Which is why Drifty, that CAMS registrars are so damn pedantic, they have to be given the rules that they work under.

Two words I haven't mentioned so far are discretion and flexibility, and Allen this then comes back to your point, if you establish the exact history it does then mitigate contentious issues like this.
Andrew

[driftwood]

Everybody is absolutely free to print numbers on chassis what ever he likes. It is getting more complicate, if he prints chassis plates with numbers for his private pleasure. Just asking to clarify your comment here your english is very good Dr A but here i have the ambiguity of our language- do you mean print info on the thread here or do you mean make ( print) new chassis plates? It gets much more complicate, when he is saying that the chevron Company did it,it may be that the factiory made an error with records this is partly what we will argue with you about- it seems to be common knowledge there are more than 1 chassis 10 plate on cars plus now we have the old pile of parts car with 10 stamped on the frame and the plate fitted to a rebuilt car ( has 10A ) and the frightening concept that this car willbe presented to get HTP papers with plate 10 or 10R /C /F? added to it because a chassis number is "a document showing an author" in the german law producing false documents is criminal.It is the same here but people have done it and will try to do it- please dont tell me that you never drive over our speed limit when you come to the UK? Ok i am joking with you here it is well known that in Germany "zis is der vay ve do zings here"

As the owner of the genuine car your are not protected by law, You will be if you can proove your car is correct and the other car is not- For example i make new Tyrrell P34 6 wheel car and fit the chassis plate of the swedish Gp winning car and then the owner of the real car who lets say has owned it since 1979 direct from ken tyrrell can show invoice bank payment and many magazine articles on his car challange sme in the court he will win and my car will be know as the replica copy fake caryou have to protect your car (and at the end your money) yourself by having all the documentation as perfect as possible.Yes and this is what we are saying openess allows this all to happen how do you know that Ralf did not make up this car from old parts and fit chassis number in late 71 with forged papers and tomorrow is old mechanic goes to the priest and makes a confession before he dies? or we find out this actually happens to 1 of the other cars claiming to be car 10 and we come and tell you this good news? this is why it is important to discuss with these "self appointed expert" historians as they talk to many people on line off line at race tracks find magazine info photos and talk about things and the info is swirling around and the jigsaw comes together in the end
If you buy a Chevron B19 you can ask the seller for the complete history going back say to the early seventies. If the seller can not supply you with that history you decide to buy or not to buy or you get a discount.well in essence yes you decide not to buy the car or spend more time doing research ( enter the "self appointed so called experts" historians to the rescue!! If you get the discount than you at risk ok what type of discount? 10% or 50%? big difference if i went to see car with no problems on fake chassi 1 owner from new car it was say worth £125k rebuilt crack tested ready to race and then i see the 5 car 10 and it is same condition BUT is £100k that to me is not a discount that is the fake car overpriced the fake car is worth half the real carand if your are honest to yourself, you know that your car may be is not the genuine article.

In reality the people take the discount and later try to find somebody less experienced, sell him the caronly a devious person will a discerning buyer will wait for the right car with history no possiblity of duplicate car) as the genuine article for a higher price. Bad luck for the unexperienced buyer if he forgot to ask for a guarantee.i had a 250GTO to sell and i had a US buyer for the car at 1 million and he had a sniff of replica car having been built with same chassi number he walked away sale lost- it turned out the info was wrong but it was too late people spending big money want "unadulterated" history but the FIA HTP system allows duplicate cars to have papers and this gives the impression the car is the real McCoy

The other thing is to protect the market.exactly and to do this we need the FIA to ban duplication of chassi number cars having papers thes ecars must carry chassi number so way off the build number list that a blind man can tell you ate 5 metrs the car is not 1 of teh original cars built at Bolton and raced in the 70`s If the market is of potential buyers is as much experienced as possible, you can only very well documented cars to a high price.it is not always about price but about getting rid if teh fake copy replica BS "air2 cars especially anything built on acar that is wellknown as destroyed and this is where transparency is required from the Chevron records they know damn well which cars died in 71 72 73 75 or wher rebuilt at the time to race again 3-8 weeks after the accident NOT 10-20 years later

[John Turner]

Originally Posted by driftwood

it does need copying here John where are you when we need you

At that time, in bed either sleeping or reading a good book!

The B19 thread has moved on a lot since Helen's post on there. I'm quite happy to move and/or copy some or all of those posts on here, but I'll make you guys work for this! You tell me which of those you want me to copy over!

[driftwood]

John maybe H`s post needed to be here to follow on thru

Andrew
An FJ became two cars in the mid sixties.
The complication arises in that the second car never competed in Formula Junior (but its chassis did as the first car). So what group does it now race with?
Twist that a bit more and the car with the continuous history actually was given a slightly later chassis that also never ran in FJ.which car carries the chassis number? hypofetically what did car 2 run in if not FJ races? libre hillclimbs? in our world ( that is where it does rain we have warm beer) the car would be accepted as a period car cos it came form teh 60`s and did compete and is not a 1990`s replica and car with new chassis but eng gbox wheels wishbones etc that did race in FJ but not with the new chassi would also be accepted as the real McCoy and in theory should have the original plate fitted - i can see where you are going but it is also why the CAMS way is probably too dictatorial and rules out both cars - up here car 1 would have full retail value and car 2 would be 20% off RRP in value?

[Dr. Alexander Lienau]

The FIA HC is the first trial to clear the situation but to have full grids of "historic" cars. I feel we all should be happy that they allowed with the HTP Papers continuation cars to race and gave the opportunity to stop all the lies by saying only the history of a car could only be checked to the early eighties, which says more then enough.

It does not help at all, if more people try to be accepted as an institution who can grant official papers about history of cars. In the end we have ten institutions and the value of their "certificates" will go to sero.

If somebody like Allen could convince the FIA that they better delegate the HC thing to him. No problem. I should only be avoided that somebody speaks bad about other peoples procedure as long there is no better worldwide known and accepted one.

[Andrew Fellowes]

fair comment, I think you might have summed up the relative values correctly too.

Andrew

[allenbrown]

Dr Lienau, thanks for your last few posts. I believe we are starting to reach some common ground.

I talk frequently with Jeremy Hall who runs the FIA's HC program and we get along very well. I research cars and write histories; Jeremy applies due diligence to a history and grants (or refuses) an HC. In the case of the March 741 that now has an HC, I wrote a 12-page history of the car and gave my view on its authenticity; Jeremy reviewed that, checked what he felt he needed to check and then gave the car an HC. The dossier included paragraphs on all the other 741s and 741 claimants.

I agree with you that we do not need more institutions that can grant "official papers". That should be the role of the FIA, delegated as they see fit. However, there is a need for independent researchers who can pull together all available information about a car and present it objectively so that the FIA can make a decision. That history is also relevant to buyers so objectivity is essential. That's where ORC fits into the picture.

Allen

[Dr. Alexander Lienau]

Hello Allen,


thank you for your friendly words. I am happen that you understood that I will not disturb anybody and I think everybody should decide, which way he wants to go. That is applicable as well with the history of his Chevron B19 (or whatever car) as long as it is for his own private pleasure.


The FIA HC is only an offer for a documentation. You as well only make an offer for a certain kind of cars, especially single seaters. Both offers fit together and do not conflict.

If I make an application for , say a Tyrell P34, to you it will be a private thing and near nobody will ever hear, that you could not give me a "certificate". In the FIA case it is more dangerous, because they make the applications public.

Would it improve thinks for you if you as well make all the certificates public, which you already granted. Then a buyer of a car with an identical Number could be cautious if the seller could not present your certificate. Next step could be to make public who (meaning which chassis) made an application for your certificate, but you refused because there was no or not enough evidence?

My feeling is there should be a common place in the Internet where you can make your historic racing car public with the number it carries and the HTP Certificate Number and may be HC-Certificate or other certificate. It is not necessary that the name of the owner is mentioned to all, it would be sufficient if the owner of this webside would be informed to help to get the owners in personal contact if conflict about a certain chassis no. arrises (like Chevron B16 No. 35 or Chevron B19 No. ???, interestingly many below No. 10).

[allenbrown]

Originally Posted by driftwood

HC or HTP its all the same to me

Well it shouldn't be; the two papers have very different purpose.

An HTP makes no statement about the age, authenticity, originality or even the manufacturer of a car. All the HTP cares about is whether it's in original spec (or, as Helen pointed out earlier, an appropriately modernised version of the original spec).

An HC does talk about age, authenticity, originality and so on.

Note that a Chevron B19 built in 2008 could get an HTP if it's built to the agreed specification. It wouldn't get an HC. Thus it would be allowed to race at many events.

Note also that an entirely genuine March 712M could have been fitted with a FVC in later life for hillclimbing and no longer be in its original specification in which case it could get an HC but not an HTP. Thus it wouldn't be allowed to race at most events unless it was put back into FVA form.

Allen

[phdm]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

Note also that an entirely genuine March 712M could have been fitted with a FVC in later life for hillclimbing and no longer be in its original specification in which case it could get an HC but not an HTP. Thus it wouldn't be allowed to race at most events unless it was put back into FVA form.

Allen

Why not Allen ?

As long as the car is built to the same specification as a car of the same model raced in period internationally (and maybe even nationally now if the event in which it took part is deemed significant), there is no reason why it wouldn't be granted an HTP. It would however need to be reclassified in the same period as the "model".
A March 712M with an FVC is definitely closer to the configuration of some F2 cars hillclimbed in 1972 or later (period HR) than a 712M with a short stroke injected BDA is to the 1971 F2 specification (period GR).

[allenbrown]

Originally Posted by Dr. Alexander Lienau

Would it improve thinks for you if you as well make all the certificates public, which you already granted. Then a buyer of a car with an identical Number could be cautious if the seller could not present your certificate. Next step could be to make public who (meaning which chassis) made an application for your certificate, but you refused because there was no or not enough evidence?

I don't do a certificate, I write a history, and in that I comment on the car's authenticity. Fortunately, so far I have been able to establish the complete history of every car I've documented but I have two in progress where I'll ending up laying out all the known facts and admitting that we cannot be certain which car this is.

As owners are paying me to research their cars - and accepting that sometimes they won't like what we find out - I would only publish the results if they agreed to it. I would like to get a few sample dossiers up on the site but I would prefer to get my customers' permission to do that.

Originally Posted by Dr. Alexander Lienau

My feeling is there should be a common place in the Internet where you can make your historic racing car public with the number it carries and the HTP Certificate Number and may be HC-Certificate or other certificate. It is not necessary that the name of the owner is mentioned to all, it would be sufficient if the owner of this webside would be informed to help to get the owners in personal contact if conflict about a certain chassis no. arrises (like Chevron B16 No. 35 or Chevron B19 No. ???, interestingly many below No. 10).

Such a website has been considered by the FIA but there are a number of logistical problems. I would be very happy to manage and operate such a site but it would be an expensive and time-consuming exercise and would require appropriate funding. If third-party funding could not be found, the alternative would be to charge people for their listing but that would reduce the proportion of people who would choose to list.

Allen

[allenbrown]

Maybe I should have used the example of a 712M with a 3.5 Buick in the back. I was trying to pick an example of a specification that never appeared in Internationals and therefore couldn't be used in historics. As FVCs weren't allowed in F2, I thought that would be a good example.

OK, here's a real one. A March 722 had a Buick 3.5 fitted to it for sprints in the UK in the late 1980s. As it only ever appeared in club events it's not in a specification that would be allowed now in historic racing. So no HTP.

[Dr. Alexander Lienau]

May be step for step. First step could be that people like the chevron Heritage webside offer for a low fee the opportunity to make the history of car public, with all the risks for the buyers that the information is not proven.

Other manufactures could join the same system by establishing a webside for "Lola`s" or Formula I cars or only cars from 1971 to 1978 (for example the masters people could ask the competitors to agree to make the chassis number public on the webside).

I think a complete register of all racing cars from 1901 to 1983 is a near impossible task. I feel the need for clarification is more in certain categories of cars beetwenn 1950 to say 1975, because that period is now adays very interesting and full with faked cars for ex: knobbly Listers, C-/D Jaguars, Ford GT 40, Lola T 70 MK 3b, Chevrons all kinds, some very special Touring cars. In the past most cars were faked not to make money but to get the old FIA papers and it should not be a problem to tell the truth as long as you accept and know, that your car is not the genuine artikel but instead "a racecar".

On the other hand there a fakes of cars with extrem high value which are produced only to fraud people for ex. Ferrari 250 SWB and GTO etc, they are so expensive that they are far out of reach of the usual trade that nobody of that kind of buyers must be protected by a public register. If you invest multimillion in car you personally have to have experience or the best adviser on earth otherwise you are gambling and should not complain if you lose your money.

As the old romans said: caviat emptor. Not the seller has to explain instead the buyer has to be careful (good old times)

[driftwood]

Allen i was being moody over the same sht different bucket to hc htp papers
i do not think we should have ANY cars getting HTP papres taht where not built in period/part of the original production run/evolved from a acr that race din period ie 1 off specials like Kincraft
All these continuation cars are blx just legalised "air" cars fakes reolicas call them what you like
in essence the old FIA papers where fine not perfect what they needed was gold silver and bronze ratings
Gold for pure originality built to EXACT period spec using many of the original parts ie tub body eng gbox body ( allowing replacement for safety crack test etc but old parts retained for ever in a box)
Silver= original car but heavily rebuilt/replaced parts or non original motor body combo
bronze cars that have flaws in lineage ie 741 scenario or ambiguous history or ownership line so that they can be revoked if a query pops up with another car same number etc

any car that cannot fall into these 3 categories are fakes air car or have fundamental things wrong with the cars spec

[driftwood]

im glad u picked anpther car engine combo- i agree 722 with rover v8 is wrong to have papers
IF it was race din 72 73 it could have them but where do you draw the line? doe sit have to compete in International events or a major national c/ship ie RAC hillclimb not the shetland hillclimb c/ship

there are many cars that raced domestic series that technically fall foul of the internatinal race title ie lola t290 chevron b19 2123 in japan f2 cars in japan FB in usa 2 litre can ams
half the ozzie NZ race cars that where built for domestic c/ships (Not F5000 tasman cars but the cheatahs elfins etc) never ran in international races

[driftwood]

a website for the FIA papers is a good thing but i think it needs to be paid for by them not us
also car owners need tobe listed for example all 3 b19 10 cars have papers but which car are you refering to the smith brown or lienau car?
ah yes that smith cars is fake the brown car is the other "real " car and leinau we are await more info
ok i exaggerate here but you can see what i mean

If we talk about cars we normally refer to the car owner or chassi number but some cars there are 2 or 3 of same number
McLaren M8E cars are another example of duplication

when people keep car chassis info secret i smell a rat - why do they want to keep info out of the public domain i am not waniong toknow how much money they earn or tax they pay but the numbers of cars and previous owners is not private or confidential info

Every car really should have a dossier like ORC produce to get the FIA papers
each race should be listed wher possible accident and if known repairs or parts replaced but that will be hard to deal with on older rebuild of cars but anything today should be documented with step by step phtos

[John Turner]

Originally Posted by driftwood

John, maybe H`s post needed to be here to follow on thru

OK, I've now copied Helen's original post over, as requested along with most of the following responses, a few of which I have edited appropriately (I hope!). Some of the discussion here may now, therefore, look a bit disjointed. For the time being I've left the B19 thread untouched but will get around to editing it shortly (but not today).

[Jeremy Hall]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

Dr Lienau, thanks for your last few posts. I believe we are starting to reach some common ground.

I talk frequently with Jeremy Hall who runs the FIA's HC program and we get along very well. I research cars and write histories; Jeremy applies due diligence to a history and grants (or refuses) an HC. In the case of the March 741 that now has an HC, I wrote a 12-page history of the car and gave my view on its authenticity; Jeremy reviewed that, checked what he felt he needed to check and then gave the car an HC. The dossier included paragraphs on all the other 741s and 741 claimants.

I agree with you that we do not need more institutions that can grant "official papers". That should be the role of the FIA, delegated as they see fit. However, there is a need for independent researchers who can pull together all available information about a car and present it objectively so that the FIA can make a decision. That history is also relevant to buyers so objectivity is essential. That's where ORC fits into the picture.

Allen

I am following this and to date have said nothing.However can I make it clear that whilst I do the due diligence on all HC applications my Due Diligence report goes to an International panel who assess the application, my due diligence and often their own knowlege/information and as a result of that they recommend to the FIA the awarding or not of an FIA Heritage Certificate.

[Andrew Fellowes]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

OK, here's a real one. A March 722 had a Buick 3.5 fitted to it for sprints in the UK in the late 1980s. As it only ever appeared in club events it's not in a specification that would be allowed now in historic racing. So no HTP.

Why could it not run against other late 1980s cars? assuming of course that you have a class for that age group. This is an extreme case of course but in Europe can an HTP be granted only to a car that is in the spec it was built to? For example a 1971 F2 FVA car that ran internationally in 1972 with BDF. How is that then classified?

As we are but temporary custodians I would agree with Dr Lienau regarding a public website, Allen the costs you refer to would I assume be that of at least one full time employee?

Andrew