X-Code Needs Title Help, May be for sale; Sad Story..

[PNewitt]

Part of my "job" as registrar is to help owners sort out some of the technical and authentication problems that may arise. I do not get into the legal speculation part for obvious reasons; but I do what I can do. Here is a sad situation where I felt I should help the owners out by posting this on the site for everyone to read, seeking a solution.

We have a real problem here with one of the GT/CS cars in the registry. A 2bbl 390 "X" code GT/CS, that has been in my 1996 Registry (8R01X155900) (door tag: 65A T 2U 04D 71 5 U) , has, in the past 6 months been through a mess of bureaucratic red tape, trying to obtain a title. The owners, Larry & Loretta Wolski took their GT/CS to get a title, and to authenticate the VIN. They thought this was the right thing to do--on their own, to be forthcoming and honest.

To their great surprise, the inspector pulled back the fender to reveal a 1967 VIN# 7R01C103069 on the inner fender/shock tower area. The front clip is intact, and was not a replacement '67 clip attached to the car (one of my orig. theories).

So, I dug up the GT/CS Registry form originally sent to me sometime between 1990 and 1996. This is what it stated:
White Stripe, Round Antenna, Orig. Grille with Marchal Lights, Orig Hood Pins, Taillight frames, with black paint (replacements), Attached reflector, 1968 Styled Steel Wheels (painted argent silver) with GT center caps
No Vinyl Top, A/C, Plaid trunk mat, Scissors Jack, Wheelwell plastic protector (in trunk), Plastic protectors on clips (to hold wiring harness), No Foam tape on inside edge of trunk lid.

In conversations with the Wolskis, I asked about the steering column, and I was told it was a non-collapsible type, meaning that it was a 1967 type, which is solid. I also asked about the numbers on the sheet metal in the trunk area. They are as follows: 8 23 (Drivers), 72 A (Passenger) There are also digits on the black part by the first bolt on the Drivers side - they are D8 and they are fairly clear. Rear numbers from U-Section; 8 10 W3 (Drivers) 72; (Passenger) 8 10 3 65(?) from the middle.

So--at this point, it looks like this car was a re-configured GT/CS (now a clone), made from parts of 8R01X155900. I have no record of what happened to the original GT/CS, and there is no record (according the Wolski's sources) of it being stolen, wrecked, etc.

The previous owner, listed in the 1996 Registry has not been contacted; at this point. That is not to say that they had anything to do with what happened to the original CS. Ten years has transpired, and it could have traded hands several times. The Owner in 1996 was three states away from where it is today, so anything could have happened along the way. The Wolskis bought it from a "Classis Car" type dealer in Illinois. They checked it out, and have no recourse with the dealer at this time.

So--it boils down to a problem for the Wolskis of not being able to obtain a title for this GT/CS (now) clone. As you can see, it is a beautiful car (named Lucy), treated and cared for like a family member (just like we do!). This whole episode has broken their heart. The Ill. Sec. of State seems to be unable to help them out. (IMO) I think that no one in the veh. inspection process is willing to commit to a determination to title it as either a '67 or '68. SADLY, this has become a real burden for the Wolskis, and the frustration has led them to seriously consider selling this beautiful (big block) Mustang; to be rid of this frustrating bureaucratic experience.

What I am appealing to everyone who reads this, is:

1. Who may know about title disputes like this (especially in the state of Illinois), and can offer some good (legal or otherwise) advise? How are they resolved? Who can they appeal to? (the inspector commented that he's never seen this type of thing before now).

2. If there is a person who is interested in buying this beautiful GT/CS clone, they can contact the Wolskis at:
lowo@comcast.net. I would expect a car like this, despite being a CS clone; that it IS a big block, 2bbl 390; at a value near $20K or more. Whomever wishes to buy this car, should be advised that they should participate in the resolution of the title, before it can be sold. No title resolved, no sale.

3. With my knowledge of the VIN from the original GT/CS, and the '67 VIN under the fender; whomever buys this Mustang, should be aware that I will register the original GT/CS VIN, with a footnote that "it has re-appeared as a 1967 GT/CS clone car", with that '67 VIN listed in the notes--in the new GT/CS Registry. This is important, since this documentation will explain/reveal the true history of this Mustang.

I appreciate any and all ideas of support. Photos of this Mustang are also in the Gallery under their name, Larry & Loretta Wolski. This Mustang was thought of as a real catch by the owners, and they had become quite attached to it. It drew a lot of attention for them when they would take it out for a drive. We all can relate to how they have felt about this jewel of a Mustang. This new situation has broken their hearts.

A couple of things to note: The taillight panel is painted argent; the rear script looks a little "skewed", and the front fender Mustang script is in the wrong loaction, as well as the horse and bars is a non-CS item. The front turn signal light housings are chrome plated. Whomever "rebuilt" this Mustang into a GT/CS clone must have chosen to go a "custom", because it's about the best CS clone I've ever seen!

(As a footnote, here is the data from their Marti Report (for the GT/CS as it was originally built in 1968).
The Marti report reads:
65A M 2D 04D 73 1 U, Order Received: 03/21/68, Car Serialized: 03/22/68
Bucked: 04/15/68, Scheduled for Build: 04/04/68, Actually Built: 04/17/68
Released: 04/19/68, Sold: 08/24/68
Order Type: Stock, DSO Item# 2700, Dealer# 73H582

Thank you for your help,

Paul M. Newitt
GT/CS Registrar.

 

[Mustanglvr]

Please explain this further.

quote: To their great surprise, the inspector pulled back the fender to reveal a 1967 VIN# 7R01C103069 on the inner fender/shock tower area. The front clip is intact, and was not a replacement '67 clip attached to the car (one of my orig. theories).

My mother`s 70 Mach I fastback came from the factory with the drivers door from a 70 convertible located down south. This was discovered when she was getting the glass replaced after it had been broken out at a K Mart parking lot when it was 6 months old. A federal Marshal and a Sheriff changed the vin number on the door and documented everything, rather than switch doors. Maybe this will help?:smile:

 

[J_Speegle]

Paul I found it interesting that you would put the car in the registry in that was rather than a note that the car had likely destroyed.

As for the "car" it will likely receive a new state VIN like it would in this state. Really surprised that the state official made mention that they had not seen/heard of a story like this. I've seen it likely a hundred times over the years.

Unfortunately its another reminder to double check (or have some one you trust) everything thing especially in this days of increasing values and the attempt to save any car that might have values.

Mustanglvr The story you included will likely relate since the door tags are not designed nor meant for registration purposes and swapping them (as part of a door swap) is very common especially in the rust belt

 

[Mosesatm]

The inspector unbolted the fender and pulled it off far enough to read the VIN under it???? He must have suspected something was wrong for him to go to that much work. Is there no dash tag, or does the dash tag not match the door tag?

 

[rvrtrash]

To their great surprise, the inspector pulled back the fender to reveal a 1967 VIN# 7R01C103069 on the inner fender/shock tower area.

I would expect a car like this, despite being a CS clone; that it IS a big block, 2bbl 390; at a value near $20K or more.


Paul M. Newitt
GT/CS Registrar.

Not to rain on anyones parade Paul, but it's not a big block car. It's a 289-2V car with a transplanted 390, and as such, I don't think it would bring the same money. Does it have the 9" rear end, heavier suspension, etc?

Steve

 

[PNewitt]

Hey Jeff,

In 1996, like all the other cars in the Registry (and before the advent of the Marti Report), I was totally unaware of the status of this GT/CS. What and how all of this happened is still a mystery. Data I got was just what people sent, and hard to confirm on an individual basis, especially back then.

In the new Registry, I'll probably treat the X code CS as a "destroyed" car (as it seems), and that the parts re-appeared on the '67 VIN'd Mustang.

I wouldn't want to mislead anyone otherwise. I guess I wasn't clear.

I just think that some states are better/worse than others about DMV, titles, etc.
I have a friend in Wash. st., that Vehicle inspectors got real snotty with him, and almost ruined the fender looking for the Ford VIN on his '67 GT-500 Shelby, worth six-figures. Washington Inspectors weren't up on the Shelby-Ford VIN differences, and how they correlated.

Yes--this does happen a lot, and I agree about the "buyer beware" aspect.

I just hate to see good folks taken for a ride with all the hassle. There is a lot emotional attachment involved--despite these hard realities. It's not like a daily-driver Toyota or anything....

Thanks for your comments and advice.

Paul.

 

[PNewitt]

Not to rain on anyones parade Paul, but it's not a big block car. It's a 289-2V car with a transplanted 390, and as such, I don't think it would bring the same money. Does it have the 9" rear end, heavier suspension, etc?

Steve

I understand. It's just that for some buyers, a big block, despite it's questionable "heritage" is so attractive, that the original (289) setup may not make a difference. It's one of those things where an individual might want that particular setup; and go against conventional thinking. It would make a nice driver CS (clone) for someone that knew it wasn't as "rare" as a (i.e. less than 100 made) documented big-block CS.

It's a bit of "auction logic". But, I appreciate your perception. It's fair & I don't disagree with you..

This Mustang will get what it gets, if it's sold... We;'ll just have to see what happens.

Paul.

 

[PNewitt]

The inspector unbolted the fender and pulled it off far enough to read the VIN under it???? He must have suspected something was wrong for him to go to that much work. Is there no dash tag, or does the dash tag not match the door tag?

As I understand it, they wanted to sell the car somewhere--on consignment, and (somehow) they felt it should be authenticated--so the State inspectors pulled back the fender. They do this sometimes in some states, despite the dash tag.

As it turns out, the State took the '68 dash tag from them.

Perhaps the Wolskis could chime in here as this thread develops. I may have lost something in the translation.

thanks for asking--
Paul.

 

[lwlw]

First, Larry and I need to thank Paul for everything that he is doing to help us.
When we purchased "Lucy" it was from a recognized classic car dealer with a large inventory. We did not feel we knew enough to buy through a personal sale. I have the original internet ads from the dealership and from collectorcartraderonline.com where they verify that the car is in fact authentic and in the registry. We pulled a Marti report before completing the sale to verify against the VIN that we were told belonged to the car. Perhaps this was not enough, but we thought going to a legitimate dealer with a license to sell was protection enough from this type of issue. (We refrain from calling it fraud due to legal reasons but our feelings at this time make us wonder.)

Earlier this year we thought we might want to sell "Lucy" so we took it to a classic car dealership in the burbs of Chicago. We had made the final payment and had a clear title under the x-code VIN. Several days after dropping the car off, Larry received a call from the owner stating that he had found another VIN on the inner fender as Paul indicated. Personally, I don't know why he would be digging for this, but I am sure that it will be a question that will never have an answer. He informed us he would not sell the car without us straightening out the matter.

Being honest people, we made arrangements to take the car to the Illinois Secretary of State Police. We were told by the inspector handling the case that he had never run across this before and seized the title and VIN tag. We were allowed to drive the car home being told that neither VIN came up stolen, scrapped, destroyed or had any other "flag."

At this point we have taken all the steps that we know of to secure an NSRA inspection sheet and have taken the car to multiple IL SOS offices that do titles and registrations. No one seems to know what we are talking about and basically sends us on our way.

We apologize to the educated community who feel that our actions show naivity and ignorance. We are just honest people who added a beautiful new "baby" to our family only to find that she really wasn't what was originally represented to us.

 

[PNewitt]

I would just like to respond to your comments:

"We were allowed to drive the car home being told that neither VIN came up stolen, scrapped, destroyed or had any other "flag.""

...Probably is ONLY for the state of Illinois. Since this car was in another part of the Midwest sometime between 1990 and 1996, there "could" be a red flag about it's history--outside of Illinois, "somewhere".

And....

"We apologize to the educated community who feel that our actions show naivity and ignorance. We are just honest people who added a beautiful new "baby" to our family only to find that she really wasn't what was originally represented to us."

I don't think that anyone would fault either one of you for this. How would you know? How many of us go pulling our fenders off to be sure we have a "legit" '68 GT/CS VIN? It was just bad luck, and I'd sure like to know how this car got the way it did.

Again, my sympathy for the both of you, and how something you loved, turned out to be so unfortunate.

Paul N.

 

[somethingspecial]

#1) Did anyone pull the right fender to check for a VIN stamping there. Mine had one on each side. It is possible to replace the inner fenders with used parts.

#2) A SVS (Stolen Vehicle System) check is nation wide. Not just state wide.
however, I wouldn't show a "junked" or "Salvaged Title" except under the VINs and only if they are currently registered.

#3) I hope when they confiscated the dash tag, they didn't destroy it. If for some reason, the matter is cleared up, and the VIN is correct for the 68 (Check under right fender) you would want the original tag back.

#4) Does the car have shoulder belts. I may be wrong, (if I am, someone please correct me) but that was a safety change mid year, and with a 155xxx VIN, you should be able to feel (if it does not have belts) a hole under the headliner just rear of the coat hooks. I don't believe 67s had the provisions for the shoulder belts.

#5) If the car was an original BB car, it should have had dual exhaust. If so, check the rear frame rails just forward of the rear spring shackles. If it was a original Dual car, the tie down plates, if missing, have two holes horizontally through the chassis, and one verticle hole with a nut insert. If it was not an original Dual car, the verticle hole would not have a nut, but simply a hex hole.

Hope this helps. Mike

 

[390cs68rcode]

I would go back to the dealer that sold it to them as a real CS and talk to them. They sold it as real and it is not. Threaten legal action if necessary.

They sold you a fake, bottom line.

 

[Mustanglvr]

I somewhat agree with Jason. But who sold it to the dealership as a fake? Who`s really the one responsible for this?

 

[lwlw]

I would go back to the dealer that sold it to them as a real CS and talk to them. They sold it as real and it is not. Threaten legal action if necessary.

They sold you a fake, bottom line.

The dealership we bought the car from is out of business.
Interestingly enough, it is now open at the same location with a very "similar" name and owned by the brother of the 1st owner. Both Larry and I have personally talked with him and received assurances that his brother would contact us. We stopped thinking this would occur after days, weeks and months passed.
We have been advised legally that since the original owner has closed the business and the current business has a new dealer #, we have no recourse.

This business is currently selling cars on eBay. Hopefully ours is an isolated incident and no one else will end up in the same situation.

 

[Midnight Special]

The dealership we bought the car from is out of business.
Interestingly enough, it is now open at the same location with a very "similar" name and owned by the brother of the 1st owner. Both Larry and I have personally talked with him and received assurances that his brother would contact us. We stopped thinking this would occur after days, weeks and months passed.
We have been advised legally that since the original owner has closed the business and the current business has a new dealer #, we have no recourse.

This business is currently selling cars on eBay. Hopefully ours is an isolated incident and no one else will end up in the same situation.

...Reading all this makes me feel very sad for you folks. Very sorry.

As this X-code is cherished like a "family member" as you say, and if it has brought you so much joy - why sell it? and why not enjoy it for what it brings you (investment aside)? What else can you do except taking Mike's advice with hopes of confirming and maybe getting the original VIN back...
'Longshot, I know, but it appears to be a beautiful car. The general admirers don't have to know her full story. I get as much pleasure from my clone as I do the originals, yet, my originals get picked apart by so called experts just as much. I don't care - I love them all. Your's is a beauty!

Respectfully,

 

[lwlw]

Tim, thank you.

We love "Lucy" and it does matter to us that she has turned out to be a clone.
Our concern is that we have a car that is paid off, without a title in our hands. We don't feel comfortable driving it - maybe we worry too much but I know Larry and I would rest alot easier if all the legal mumbo-jumbo was behind us.

 

[Mosesatm]

That's just rude and I will never understand why people do it, especially to a driver. But then if you blast past them fast enough they won't be able to pick it apart!

 

[joedls]

That's just rude and I will never understand why people do it, especially to a driver.

Amen, Arlie!!!

But then if you blast past them fast enough they won't be able to pick it apart!

Exactly :wink:

 

[franklinair]

Not to imply any intentional wrongdoing, but for the benefit of ALL website members, what dealer was involved in the sale transaction? No longer in business?
Neil Hoppe

 

[Midnight Special]

Tim, thank you.

We love "Lucy" and it does matter to us that she has turned out to be a clone.
Our concern is that we have a car that is paid off, without a title in our hands. We don't feel comfortable driving it - maybe we worry too much but I know Larry and I would rest alot easier if all the legal mumbo-jumbo was behind us.

...You will at the very least get a state issued (modified) VIN. My hope is that you can verify enough to recover the '68 VIN.

In any case, my heart goes out to you.


Arlie - I have tried what you said, but I keep running out of gas & have to stop - THAT's when they git me! ;-))