[Mr_GTO]

242 didn't start on GTO's until 1966. So your 64 you wouldn't have known unless you had the PHS paperwork.

I mean you could try to make it right and refund the money and take the car back or say you didn't know it was a not a GTO and that you were ignorant of the VIN numbers.

As they say, Buyer beware.

[Phil Goat Nelson]

The data plate you just posted (new thread) says "242". Are you saying that the title said "237" and thats what they ran the PHS docs from?

Its odd that this was not noticed either by you when you bought it or the new buyer when he bought it. I realize they didn't start putting the full VIN under the windshield until '68, but most people would still look at the data plate to verify the vin matches the title somewhere along the line.

But the oddest part is the number of discrepancies between the build out of the actual car, with its "242" code, etc. and the VIN, which does not reflect many of the options, etc. that were clearly on the car, including the ones pointed out by gtoric: "Tempest or Le Mans would not have received a dual-gate, because the dual-gate was only offered for the THM400, and the GTO is the only A-body that got that trans. The GTO rear bumper was also unique with the integrated backup lights" Also, the chrome trim which would only have been put on with a vinyl roof option, which you said wasn't reflected in the vin...how many "clonemakers" would go to the trouble of adding that to a car that shouldn't have had it? All these suggest that the vin number was for a different car entirely.

As an aside, I was one of the bidders on this car, but backed out at the last minute because I didn't like the parchment interior...WHEW!! Glad I don't have to sort this one out!

[66 tempest]

I understand the point, of not knowing about vin numbers, it wasn't till i became a member of this forum,that i knew the 242 was the first 3 numbers for the GTO.. who knows maybe the buyer would except partial payment back, agree to a fare value of the GTO clone and have spare money.. I would think a GTO fanatic would check these numbers upon recieving car.. also it could be that the previous owner (before you) changed the title, when he went to the insurance company or registry, the tital may have not stated it was a GTO.. just pontiac.. the agent ask you what model you say GTO now the registration states gto along with the title.. so you maybe able to go back to the person you bought it from and get your money back, if it came to that extent..I would guess this guy is not going to give up on this, he probaly paid a good chunk of change for the car.

[PonchoV8]

I understand not knowing before or when you buy a car, but not knowing when you sold a car??? That's when it matters. Did the farmer have a title that said GTO? Or did you apply for it thinking it was a GTO? Besides the 67 VIN on the door says 242 on a GTO right?

[ctgross]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gto_buyer:
Sorry, it did start with 235. No, back when I bought the car, I was not aware of the 242 and vin id history, just data plate which my dad helped me decode. Title said GTO so I never gave it a second thought until I got into these more. When I sold it the vin was not an issue, never was asked to any number, just if the title was clear and the data plate matched the car.

If it's and buts were candies and nuts we all would have a merry Christmas <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd say, after reading this entire confusing thread, that you plea your case to the now owner. You haven't told us what the owner wants or expects to make him happy? Has he made any attempt(or you), phone, e-mail, etc. to make things right? That old buyer beware thing only goes so far if you can't persuade him, or possibly a Judge, that you had no intentions of fraud.

[sub4600]

I was unware of the 242 when I sold it. Yes, I know the data does say 242 and the vin started 235. There has to be an explanation about this car somewhere out there, it just does not add up. Why would someone change the vin from a GTO to a Tempest...stolen???? Why would none of the vin info match the car? I guess with a car 40 years old, there is quite a bit of history that goes along with it and some may never be learned. I'm much wiser now and know to check for the 242 and only buy after running PHS docs and making sure everything jives with the car. The guy made me an offer to give him back 10,000.00, of the 14,000.00 purchase price, because a certified appraiser said it was only worth 4000.00....even if this was a clone, c'mon 4000.00.

[sub4600]

the farmer guy I bought it from had the title which stated GTO when I bought it and Nebraska DMV issued a new one to me the same way...The guy also asked for a second lower bill of sale to register the car of 2500.00, so not to pay taxes in California, wonder if zI pushed that envelope if he might back off, or call the California Bar and inquire about this attorney.

[az67goat]

As I understand it, the VIN is also stamped on the top of the frame at the rear, behind the rear driver side fender. Has anyone else heard this? I think the baoy has to be lifted off to see it.

This is from the "GTO alley" web site:

"(1964-74) All models came with frame identification serial number, date of manufacture and part number, stamped on the left side rear frame between the rear axle and the number 6 body bolt. "

Difficult to get to, but it would decide the issue I would think.

[PonchoV8]

Someone I know pawned a title to a 64 Ford truck. He didn't pay the loan for it, but the police impounded it before the pawn-broker could get it. The guy bailed his truck out of jail, the pawn shop sold off it's loan accounts to a third party, but the guy still has his truck without a title--he can't get a title either. However, the VIN on that year/model of truck is on the door, so he buys a used door, swaps it onto his truck and titles it as a different truck. If your car is a GTO with a tempest VIN, someone wanted to keep there GTO (or wanted to keep someone else's GTO) so they bought a Tempest and put the VIN on the GTO so they could still keep and drive the car. Maybe they planned to secure a 67 VIN someday, but never got around to it.

[PonchoV8]

There's a moral issue here and I (personally) would have to make it right. See if he will settle for $8000 or buy the car back for the $14,000. I'm guessing the latter would be too much trouble since you're about 2000 miles away. That's a mess and I'm sorry to say, it isn't his fault. He bought what was represented to him as a GTO under contract and that's not what was delivered to him. You need to contact a lawyer and tell him exactly what happened. The first visit is usually free, but if it cost $20 to hear what he would say, it'd be worth it.

[Geeto 67]

As far as I can see if you didn't know when you sold the car and didn't have a reason to suspect a fake when you sold the car (because of the title) you may be ok, there is still an element of knowing that you knew the car was a fake (if a fake at all) and that you sold it to him with the intention of defrauding him. This may cost you some money in legal fees either way so your best bet is to probably speak to a lawyer now before things esclate. I don;t think this guy will just go away if he feels genuinly defauded. From now on if you talk to him do it by letter or make detailed notes of conversations you have had with him via telephone or in person at the time you are having the conversation. Do not speculate as to what has occured here as most people will just interprete that as "covering your a$$" or that you are trying to hide something. YOu can ask him what remedy he wants but don't agree to anything or make offers off the cuff. Remember protect yourself first, as this guy is not looking for your best interest. I probably would not call the California bar for anything more than to verify the guy's attory is legit, which he most likely is. If you try to muscle him this way (or any other way for that matter) the odds are you will casue them to spring into action quicker, and probally piss them off to boot. although he may be accused of defauding the state of California of taxes, it doesn't help you case any (except maybe credibility if you ever get to trial) and reporting him will not stop him from suing you.

Before I tell you what I think happened with your car, Let me tell you a little bit about some things I have seen in the hobby. Recently I have purchased a shell to help the restoration of my own 1967 GTO. Although I would have liked to see the vin and data tag for information I made sure the owner verified in writing that he destroyed them (he claims to have had months before I bought the shell). When I first purchased my GTO, in the numerous parts that I acquired with the car (a couple of cars worth of stuff plus a couple of parts cars) was a bag containing Vin plates, Titles, and Data plates to the cars that the previous owner had parted out. Foolishly I destroyed them without recording the info or checking PHS. A shop that was doing work on my car inadvertenly bent the original frame under my GTO when they tried to lift it incorrectly on a lift. I check the frame for vin numbers and when I could not find any I checked the frame in my 1967 GTO parts car for numbers. When I didn't find any there I just used the frame from the parts car under my GTO. Some 1967's have frame numbers and some don't. When I was still in school, I read about two law cases, one where two kids were arrested for GTA in 1967 for using a 1964 GTO, a 1967 tempest, and a stolen 1967 GTO to build two cars that they could sell. Basically they put the 1967's GTO drive train in the 1964 and used the 1967 tempest's vin tag to be able to sell the 1967 GTO as a reisterable roller. The second case was where a 1967 GTO that was seized by police for being a nusance was issued a new vin so it could be sold and registered.

Now here is what I think happened. If you say the data plate doesn't match the PHS stuff but matches the car you have one of two scenarios: 1) the data plate is correct for the shell; or 2) the data plate was restamped to reflect changes to shell by a previous owner. I am unclear if you said the vin on the data plate matched the vin. If it did then the data plate has been restamped (easy to do, we used to do it all the time for vettes we restored at a shop I used to work at), if not then the data plate matches the body shell. If the tail panel and other GT ospecific items look factory installed chances are that they were. What I think is that you got a piecemeal car, a car put together by someone else. It was likely a real GTO that may have been stolen and a previous owner swapped vins on the car to be able to register it, or one that was built out of two wrecked cars. Both of these things will be hard to prove with talking to previous owners and possible doing a search for the vin in the DMV archives and the national stolen car registry. Even if the data plate matches the vin the assembler may have still used a real GTO body shell and just had the data plate replicated with the new vin. This happened with sho cars a lot in the 1970's and 1980's becasue they used a lot of junkyard parts and didn't want to be accused of assembling cars out of stolen parts. If your vin does not have the rosette rivets holding it in place chances are it has been changed. Since you said that a lot of the car has matchign components (like the trans)I imagine this was a stolen car back in the day or an amature restoration done without knowledge of vin decoding (say arounf the early 1980s) that somebody swapped vins on to be able to register and sell. So how does this help you? probably not a lot other than to say based upon the bare metal body you had no reason to suspect the car was not what the title says it was and that you didn't know about the vin decoding being new to the hobby and all.

Since a real GTO is 9.5 times out of 10 defined by the vin number, I am sorry to say that the buyer of your car doesn't have a real GTO.

[Geeto 67]

As to PonchoV8's moral issue: becasue this car was bought on ebay, I think the buyer owed some responsibility to checking out the vin before buying the car. He cannot claim that you cannot be ignorant to the vin of the car while at the same time claiming he was ignorant of the vin of the car. I think the amount the buyer paid over the value of what the vin states the car is should be labeld the "stupidity tax" as in you got exactly what you were stupid enough not to research. This of course is just my opinion and, what to I know.

Incidently, do not take this approach with him, gto_buyer you'll only poke the bear. I woudl get your own appraiser and have a valuation done. Make sure you get a certified and notarized appraisal letter from the other guy showing value. When you get your appraisal done you'll send it back to him certified and notarized. Personally I think your car in that condition (based upon link pics) with that combinaton of options is worth about what you paid for it $7-8K.

[Phil Goat Nelson]

Based upon everything posted here, I have to think it WAS a GTO...and still is. Only without a proper title. One would have to suspect that it was stolen sometime, perhaps a long time ago and it is only now being discovered. The title may be for a Tempest that the thief bought on the market (maybe even one that had been totalled but before the DMV was notified) and he managed to sell it with the bogus title.

In any event, you were equally swindled by the person you bought it from 4 months before you resold it, so you should be able to sue him for whatever loss you take, including expenses, but you better start talking to your own lawyer before the statute of limitations impedes your ability to do so.

Good Luck!

[Phil Goat Nelson]

One other thing...the data plate only has the "242XX" then the plant where it was built. But inside the drivers door pillar another tag includes the full VIN, so this is even more important than the data plate. If you can diplomatically ask the buyer to do so, it would be interesting to find out exactly what the full VIN is, and then spend the 30 bucks to get a PHS document on that VIN to see how closely it matches to the actual car. IF it does, then I think you may be able to show it is in fact a GTO and not a clone. It may also help to check it against the stolen vehicle list to see if there's a match. If it was stolen many years ago, it may be possible to get a new title issued, probably with an asterik though. What a mess, eh?

[Sixty7Goat]

Buyer had a responsibility to question the Vin# BEFORE he bought it, end of story. The car isn't in your possesion anymore, you don't know what he has done to it since. There's to many things that don't make sense to start giving money back. If the car had a fake GTO Vin# on it, then I could see the problem. But if it flat out has a Lemans or Tempest Vin#, the information was there.

[66 tempest]

I would not let the car go for 4,000 I've seen very well done clones for 7-8,500 and personally i would pay more if that was a car i desired very much, and could not muster up enough dough or couldn't justify spending 25-35 grand for a real GTO..

[retrojoe]

Sounds like the guy is trying to get your car for free! If the car was a lemans it would have needed to have the "gills" removed to clone it to a GTO. I'm not sure if the Tempest came with those as well. It's a good looking car and worth a heck of alot more than 4k!!! If this guy takes you to court, which he would have to file in your state and travel to it as well, the court could tell him that he also had the chance to research the car before buying it. He could have flown out and checked everything before buying it. I think this falls under buyer beware. All of us have the chance to pursue background on our major purchases before buying. If we don't well......

Do you have a copy of your e-bay listing? It may help you. When you listed it - did you include a VIN number? If so - he had the information prior to purchasing the car.

Where did you sell the car? Were you in California or Nebraska? Where in California is this guy located and what has his lawyer told you?

[sub4600]

This is why I brought this to this forum, you guys are honest and give some valid opinions. It is hard to convey things via e-mail style replys, so please understand that I had no knowledge when I bought this and when I sold this that it was not a GTO. I have tried to do quite a bit of research on this and the best of what I have come up with is this probably is what some of you feel, stolen at some time, pieced together and re-titled to cover the trail. The PHS docs he has are correct for the vin that is stamped, just not for this car though. the amount of work for someone to change out steering columns, doors, interiors, headliners, rear tail panels, grilles, tansmissions, hoods, wheels most likely would have been to costly and next to impossible for the average to knowledgable guy, especially if this was done years ago. Keep in mind, for 7 months this guy was completely happy, calling to ask me things from time to time, sending photos of things he was doing and how glad he was that he bought the car and loved having it. I didn't remember the vin number until he brought it up to me after a friend suggested sending in to Pontiac HS. I was shocked when he told me and he said I don't think you had any knowledge of this, but he wanted and immediate refund...that is when I said, hold the brakes, those documents are ginig to anyone who submits a legit vin # regardless of where it comes from, they don't see the car, just the vin. Therefore, someone could have and most likely did switch the vin for somereason at sometime. He is a licensed BMW dealer and I'm sure he checks every car he buys, I spoke with a lawyer in California who is a friend of a friend and he said if it went to cort the first thing the judge would say is "Your a licensed dealer, he is not, you should have known better and checked into this before buying the car, case closed." Now if that would actually happen, I'm not sure and I don't want to screw the guy over, but those funds are long gone now and though I feel bad that he found this out, I really don't feel how this should fall back on me. If this happend now, yes, definately, I know better and know alot more than I did before, but I learn everyday and still get nervious until the PHS docs come back. I read on a auction site that in 1970 there were 1200 authentic documented Hemi Cuda's, today there are 1500. I have kept my cool and tried not to let my temper get involved, the Laywer seems to have been thrown this by somone who is this guys friend, because his first e-mail was this.

Dear Mr. Catania,

I have reviewed the information provided by Jack Kee. Your listing clearly states a 1967 GTO hardtop. My client received a 1967 Tempest. Your contract does state "as is" but it also clearly states 1967 GTO. You state numerous times that the vehicle being sold is a GTO, this is pure fraud. Please respond ASAP as the FBI is being reviewing this matter and we will pursue this matter through the legal system. Please advise me on you will be resolving this matter.

Cordially,
Adam Marangell
Attorney at Law

ALM: jlm


my response:

If you see the title of the car it clearly states 1967 GTO hardtop, that is how I purchased it and that is how I sold it. From the information I gathered from the vehicles data plate, it stated 67 GTO two door hard top, Tyrol blue color, with a parchment interior, air conditioning, three speed transmission, V8, with bucket seats. All of that information is true and correct and I sold the car accordingly. I am not an expert in the automobile industry, Mr. Kee is, he is a licensed car dealer and knowingly chose to bid and purchase the said car that was listed on ebay, he knows way more about buying and selling cars than I will ever know. I knew little about Vin id's except that it had to match the title. If he has been in the automobile industry as long as he says and knows so much about cars, why did he not research this before buying, instead of coming back nearly two months later to make this claim. There was nothing to my knowledge that this car was not a GTO and the title and data plate confirm that. You as a lawyer should know the definition of fraud is defined as a deception deliberately practiced to secure unfair or unlawful gain. I did neither of these and don't like being accused of such. I'm sorry if Mr. Kee has buyers remorse and no longer wishes the said car, but this does not make it my problem now. I listed honestly and truthfully everything I knew about the car. In researching since Mr. Kees accusations, I found that the data plate, not the Vin is the most important plate on the car, as it shows the S.O. (sales order) number, usually in the lower right-hand-corner. This is the number dedicated to the car before it is built and assigned a VIN. If this car has been tampered with or worse stolen, it was not to my knowledge, nor do I believe to the individual who sold me the car. In the course of 40 years these cars can change hands numerous times and the history is usually impossible to find. When I purchased the GTO, I was told by my auto technician to check the information on the data plate inside the firewall and to make sure that it matched up to what you were buying and it did to a tee. Mr. Kee read me off these documents he sent away for and nothing matches this car, not the original color, interior, dash, transmission, nothing, which makes me further believe that the car is what it is titled as, a 1967 GTO, not a Tempest. If he wishes to pursue this with threats and lawsuits and defamation of my character, I cannot do anything about that. If he calls again and wishes to speak to my daughter, a minor of 14 years and harasses her with threats of what he will pursue with me, upsetting her to the point of tears, I will be happy to file a suit myself. I have done nothing wrong, I hid nothing, nor did I maliciously try and financially gain or deceive Mr. Kees.

Respectfully,

Brian Catania

He then called me and was a pretty decent guy on the phone, almost humble, because i asked him if he had seen the car and he just said no, wouldn't know what I was looking at. He then sent a letter mentioning 4 times, the "GTE" in question. "GTE" now I know I didn't sell a GTE...again, I sympathize with the guy, but it is kind of like musical chairs and the last one out. Know one knew or suspected anything about this car...what if you bought a house and 9 mos. later you found out it leaks when it snows, it becomes your problem, not the previous owners. I don't want this to come across as an assh@#$, but this is my only source of income for a family of 7 right now and I work my butt off restoring these cars, because I love it and because to raise five kids. I guess what ticked me off is when he came back to me and said "It is a Tempest and only worth 4000.00 that he could by like that all day long, I then said find one like that for 4000.00. I will keep you posted as this continues or ends.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gto_buyer:
Dear Mr. Catania,

I have reviewed the information provided by Jack Kee. Your listing clearly states a 1967 GTO hardtop. My client received a 1967 Tempest. Your contract does state "as is" but it also clearly states 1967 GTO. You state numerous times that the vehicle being sold is a GTO, this is pure fraud. Please respond ASAP as the FBI is being reviewing this matter and we will pursue this matter through the legal system. Please advise me on you will be resolving this matter.

Cordially,
Adam Marangell
Attorney at Law
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay. At this point, he's throwing spaghetti at the wall to see what will stick. The threat about the FBI reviewing the matter - that's a joke. Frankly, I'm not certain he's permitted to make the threat of criminal prosecution to get you to meet his demands - he's arguably treading on thin ice. California Rule of Professional Conduct 5-100(a) provides as follows:

Rule 5-100. Threatening Criminal, Administrative, or Disciplinary Charges

(A) A member shall not threaten to present criminal, administrative, or disciplinary charges to obtain an advantage in a civil dispute.

The rules govern the conduct of attorneys practicing in the state.

Also - I've never heard of "pure fraud." That's a new one to me! And, if that's the e-mail he actually sent you - ugh - the grammar is horrible.

The lawyer you talked to is generally correct when it involves a mistake of fact in a contract dispute. Normally, the "professional" is considered to have superior knowledge and is charged with more culpability where the parties make a mistake in the context of a contract. That "rule" doesn't apply where there is alleged misrepresentation. Also - FYI - negligent misrepresentation may consititute fruad in certain circumstances.

I would not talk with his attorney any further and would not put anything in writing. Of course, keep everything he sent you - and print a copy of that e-mail about the FBI being involved.

Good luck.