Check out this story

[robert campbell]

"New" Shelby's as endorsed by Carroll himself at the time. Not vintage original first run Shelby's. Authentic to the point that Carroll says they are.

If someone purchased one of these thinking it was an orginal 67 or 68 Shelby, they were very uninformed. They do "vaguely" resemble an orginal, but I could build a way closer clone from aftermaket parts.

Unique, in my mind, did not misrepresent these cars in any way. And based on the options and what people will pay for high performance cars in a turn key form... worth every bit of the $200k the buyer invested. Will they hold there value like an orginal Shelby or GT/CS.... Doubtfull! There may be the rub...

Rob

 

[BroadwayBlue]

I didn't think the issue at hand was whether or not they are original Shelbys.

I thought part of the investigation was was related to "title washing". Basically, taking a salvaged vin to another state to title it so that it not longer shows salvaged.

And the switching of VINs

 

[robert campbell]

The title washing thing is interesting to me. first the cars were determined to be salvaged so in that thought, not to be sold as that car or VIN again. So the body (what was left) was transformed into a "new" Mustang with no connection or need to be connected to the orginal VIN.

Then Unique applied a "new" VIN to them that resembles an original Shelby VIN plate. Not sure why they may have had to title wash to title the car with a new VIN to resell it.

Again the old VIN, if a salvaged car, had nothing to do with the new car created. To me, from the outside a legal way to use salvaged cars to create a new version of a Mustang. Again now that Dynacor exists, a moot point. But at the time a legal way to build a new car. You or I could do the same thing if we wished to. I do not think they were misrepresting or stealing the identities of Mustangs. To leave the old VIN on the car would only lead to confusion.

Again my thoughts on this.

 

[franklinair]

States vary on their laws regarding titles/VINs. I don't know Texas's regulations. But I would think a legit business there would know. If they are in essance remanufacturing a car, I would think there would be a legal method to re-title the remanufactured vehicle. Surely they would (should) keep records of the VINs of cars they acquired to verify lawful ownership. Then after remanufacturing the car a new VIN would be assigned with the knowledge & approval of the state DMV. This is called traceability, and is utilized & ENFORCED in the aviation industry. I'd like to hear Unique's position. Its inconceivable to me that a relatively high dollar & high visibility business like theirs would operate outside the law. Not to say its never happened, but the law of averages would say its unlikely. MHO
Neil Hoppe

 

[clubpro]

The latest from Shelby's headquarters is they are in the process of pulling their licensing agreement with Unique Performance. I wouldn't be surprised if Chip Foose is next to pull his association with the company.

Ron

 

[CALIF GIRL]

All

I feel that Unique performance is unfairly being taken down by an uneducated buyer. Maybe there is more, but it sounds like a suit happy person.

I do not think the problem here is the Shelby aspect or an uneducated buyer. From what I read, it sounds to me the problem is the removing of the original VIN numbers. I do not know Texas laws but it is my impression that in most states this is illegal.

Every car is issued a VIN number and is forever identified and associated with that VIN. Even a salvaged car carries the original VIN, and when the salvaged vehicle is fixed and deemed capable and safe to be roadworthy again it uses the original Vin. The title should read salvaged on it to inform any prospective buyer the car was detrmined at one time to be totaled. This often brings a vehicles value down.

I have seen cases where Calif DMV ( Department of Motor Vehicles) reassigns an identification number, However, these reassigned numbers look nothing like an original VIN and are very obivous.

 

[robert campbell]

In Washington new VIN's are attached to any salvaged car and even to cars that come across from another state with any "appearance" of being assembled (multiple VIN's or obvious major "clip" installations. At this point the orginal VIN is of zero value in this state. I have personal experience in this area.

My assumtion (very generous person most of the time) is that Unique tiled these cars per the new VIN number they installed and was titled properly "legally". The orginal VIN would again be of dubious value and have zero relationship to the car. And would add to the confusion.

Anyone walking through this door that did realize this car was assembled from an old body was an uninformed shopper. The web site totally leads you to that conclusion! At the same time to the educated Mustang person this was apparent, but Unique better have put this in the fine print somewhere during the sale. And I bet they did.

Someone assumed this was an orginal "vintage" first run Shelby. Now they are suing out of their ignornance in my opinion.

Time will tell, and again if Unique was not delivering the cars on time for that price, then shame on them.

Rob

 

[CALIF GIRL]

In Washington new VIN's are attached to any salvaged car and even to cars that come across from another state with any "appearance" of being assembled (multiple VIN's or obvious major "clip" installations. At this point the orginal VIN is of zero value in this state. I have personal experience in this area.

If I came across a car like this In Calif, chances are extremly high that it would be impounded until a vehicle theft investigator from my department made sure it was not a stolen vehicle that had been vin switched.

 

[joedls]

I'm reserving judgement until all the facts are out (or at least both sides of the story). I have had my own experience (firsthand) with inaccurate reporting by the media. So who knows what the facts really are. For one thing, no charges have been filed yet. It is still under investigation.

We shall see..................

Or maybe not :wink:

 

[PNewitt]

I agree with Joe, in that "we'll just have to see" what happens here; to reserve judgement.

Although, I have had this impression that a company like this can come across as pretentious, aimed at the wealthy baby-boomers that missed out on the '67 Shelby the first time around.

From my perspective (and SAAC member), I am from the school of original heritage of Shelby, in Venice, CA., and out at LAX (together from about 1964-67). Winning races, and building everything from the GT-350 to the Daytona. Those guys worked very, very hard to create that Shelby history that we all dream about. Lots of innovation, and clever California hot rodding ideas for serious race cars to compete with the best in Europe.

For another company to ride on that heritage, and charging tons of $$ for parts and cars, doesn't impress me. But, I know you can never go home again, etc...

So--there is a part of this, where I know where some may find this news "satisfying". I've always had a bit of "that just ain't right" when I see any car company ride on the heels of another's hard-earned heritage. That's marketing, I know, but I just prefer to appreciate the "real" Shelbys as they are.

The bottom line issue here is the titling, and how it was handled. That is up to the authorities to decide. Because this is a high-dollar situation, something will probably go down.

Just my two bits.

Paul N.

 

[CougarCJ]

Couple of observations.

Keeping an original fastback coded Mustang VIN and a clean title is key to maintaining the cars pedigree for Unique.

Using a Dynacorn body would make the cars "kit cars". Kit cars or home built cars while done privately for personal use, have a set of rules set by the different states. Mostly safety and light requirements.
Kit cars aren't supposed to be sold by the manufacturer complete. Partially assembled only.

Unique Performance cannot 'manufacture' cars. If they did, they would have to comply with the Feds, and all of the DOT and safety crash testing, 2007federal emissions standards, and a host of other things.

I think that there is a recent story about Boyd Coddington, where he got into trouble with vintage VIN's on scratch build hot rods.

 

[robert campbell]

If I came across a car like this In Calif, chances are extremly high that it would be impounded until a vehicle theft investigator from my department made sure it was not a stolen vehicle that had been vin switched.

These are fully documented Wasington State Patrol VIN numbers. Endorsed by Olympia, Washington. Assigned becasue the car was salvaged or assembled. Funny how states do not trust each other. I am totally confident that if a California official inspected a Washington car with a State Patrol endorsed VIN number, they would be satified. I guess California might be the exception.... I can go into detail on how this process works in Washington.

Where do you draw the line between a car that is still "enought there" to qualify for its orginal VIN?? 20 percent there? 30 percent?? Gee, maybe 50 percent....

That is why many states assign there own VIN (read vehicle identification number) to cars that are salvaged or assembled. The cars are no longer how they came from the factory... Many states do this.

Rob

 

[PNewitt]

So, I guess in hindsight, (from what I've read so far) Unique should have first laid their cards out with the Texas DMV, and requested some sort of VIN solution for the types of cars that they wanted to build. Get some sort of designated "new" Texas VIN numbers for each of their $100-200K cars. I would think that kind of paperwork would have helped in securing the value, as well as the investment value for long term. Now, I'm wondering what owners will be able to do with the Unique vehicles they now have--along with any of their dealers with stock on hand.

Perhaps Shelby should have demanded a designated, approved VIN process, as a criteria for the endorsement. What a mess.

The business/hobby needs to figure out the proper process to avoid these types of situations. There was a GT/CS clone situation not all that long ago, that was a mess with the Atty. Gen in Illinois. Yes--in general,states don't trust each other, and I think it's territorial, and some of it's beauracratic self-righteousness.

The feds probably can't get involved, because the (new) car companies would rather see people just give up these old cars to buy their new ones, to take away any incentive for anyone to own an older car.

Paul N.

 

[BroadwayBlue]

The latest from Shelby's headquarters is they are in the process of pulling their licensing agreement with Unique Performance. I wouldn't be surprised if Chip Foose is next to pull his association with the company.

Ron

I believe the fact that Shelby pulling out was before all this latest news.

They indicated they were going to ending the licensing agreement because of people waiting too long after leaving their deposit on cars, not due to the VIN/Title issues.

Of course it's possible they were suspicious that something was up too.

 

[franklinair]

In answer to Rob's question of what percentage of a car "that is still enough there" to qualify to retain its VIN: the answer is 0%. All you really need is the VIN tag. The inner fender numbers are easy enough to duplicate. (The steel stamp tool set that is a dead on match to Ford's is sold by a well known auto parts & tool retailer). As far as 'washing' a title, try GA or AL. I've seen it done. Where there is a will, there is a way. Even with a Marti Report ('67 & up) a car can be built to the original factory spec's, and you'd never know the difference when properly done. Prior to '67, (no Marti info available) you can even make a GT out of a plain Jane model. Eventually ALL states will wake up and cooperate through a national computer hook-up........Until then- anybody want a 1968 Shelby GT KR convertible Cheap? Just send me the VIN tag, and I'll modify an old '67 coupe from the junkyard. JUST KIDDING. But it can be done. Buyer beware.
Neil

 

[robert campbell]

Neil/Paul/Rich,
All of you are right on!! If Unique was not delivering the goods, then shame on them. Neil, 0% is correct in my mind also. We could build a totally believable car from nothing but the VIN number! You wouldn’t even need the old plate!! I believe Rich is correct! No car after the deposit! Unique, you deserve to be burned! Paul, Carroll and Unique should have thought the titling process out better. From what I read and the website, they did not represent these cars as original first run Shelby’s, and as we all know they are not even close from a visual aspect. They are high performance “Eleanor’s”. Carroll respected the quality, the concept of the car, and the company enough to lend his endorsement to a continuation of the line. Sounds like they went under or bankrupt or whatever. Too bad for Carroll and the people who never got a car and put down deposits. If that is the case then Unique should pay.

But to pin them for misrepresenting cars as original Shelby’s…. What an ignorant buyer!!!

What a mess!! But it reminds me a bit of Joe and his hugely unfortunate accident with his car. He may have been able to make a case for some retribution from the installer of his engine. He chose the high road not to even consider that. My personal feeling of one of the major problems in America is not taking responsibility for your actions or always looking to blame someone else for your misfortune. I have never sued anyone for anything and doubt I ever will. I totally respect Joe for his stance on his accident!

I bet the bottom of this is some buyer that felt he or she was misled. What did Neil say….. Buyer beware!!!! Mommy or the law should not bail you out of stupidity!!! Unique and Carroll did not represent these cars as original first run Shelby’s!

Rob

 

[CALIF GIRL]

But to pin them for misrepresenting cars as original Shelby’s…. What an ignorant buyer!!!

Rob,
You and I must be reading different articles. The ones I read said nothing about a person suing the company because of misrepresenting the cars as original Shelby's. It said the VINS had been removed from the vehicles and the company was being investigated for "title washing".

 

[robert campbell]

My thought is the only way that this would surface, is that someone was dissatisfied with his or her purchase in some way. The cars had been sold legally. They owner got a title and a car. What would there be to investigate?? Nothing, right?

In Washington the “new” VIN number is nothing more than a “sticky” label on the door jam. It is an Official State of Washington label.

The Unique plate was right on the spot that a 67 would have its original VIN. Soooooo they pried off the label to see what was underneath. O my god the VIN was removed!!! They must be doing something illegal!

Title washing to me is titling a “decent” car without a title (stolen) with a car that has a good title, but is beyond repair. Easy to do. If Unique had stolen cars that they ground off the VIN’s then shame on them.

In Washington if you do not have the title of a car you must wait 3 years after you register it for anyone to claim it. This happened to me. I bought a car with a title that did not match “all” of the VIN’s on the car. It had came from South Carolina via a friend. He had not transferred the title. Bad decision by Rob!! So for three years I could not sell it. After 3 years if no one claims it they issue you the title with the new State of Washington VIN. It is then yours to sell or whatever.

Maybe Texas has a similar wait time for salvaged cars and they sold them before the time limit. But they had to have a legal title with the Unique VIN number on them to sell them. Not sure of all the Texas laws, but some owner sued them after prying off the VIN plate. Looking for a VIN number underneath it. Wouldn’t it be funny if the car in question was a 68 and the number was just under the flange of the fender….. Or if all the 67 numbers were on the passenger side covered by the fender flange.

This is a case where the feds are involved with the authentication of a classic Mustang. Hope they have a clue on how to do that…..

What a mess, but I will bet a set of classic Corvette door lock knobs (who cares) that one customer sued them for representing these cars as vintage Shelby’s. Even the video stream led you to believe that.

Rob

 

[PNewitt]

As they say...we'll wait to "see the other shoe drop" on this story.

I'll be interested to see where this goes, and what actually happened to lead to the cops being involved...

Paul N.

 

[franklinair]

There is still TOO much we don't know about the situation (Texas regulations, title procedures, etc.) I too can't believe a company and/or management could or would be so blatantly stupid as to try to sell high dollar, high visibility cars knowingly illegally. Not to say it couldn't happen, but too much is unknown at this point to be judgemental, pro or con. Let's all just wait until the situation unfolds, because as it now stands, none of us really knows anything factual. Just speculation.
Neil