Questions about my VIN tag.

[charger_fan_4ever]

Soooo April Fools this is really a U code car ?

[69CoronetRT]

MCG wrote: "when Dave Wise inspected the car......

That's a point that has been completely overlooked.  Everyone wants to criticize people involved with perpetrating "falsehoods" on a car but what about the "experts" who escalating the problem by putting on their stamp of approval on the vehicle?  The "experts" that certified the car as being "original" made the ordeal even worse.  When these so called "experts" cannot recognize contradictions and problems with these VIN issues, they have no business documenting cars.  Instead of protecting the Industry against fraud, they add to its impropriety.

I completely agree. 

Agree. 

The center point pieces of 'evidence' are the most easily faked...the fender tag and VIN plate. There is no supporting factory paper documentation or credible owner history presented. There is no chain of custody through the years. And yet, people are willing to vouch for this car?

[Dodge Don]

I had a 70 Charger R/T SE (top banana hardtop, V21, Tan leather interior....man I wish I kept the car) where the licensing/registation unit made a mistake on the title....they had a V instead of the correct U in the VIN. I could have used the messed up title to essentially create a six pack car....I didn't....and it was ultimately restored correctly as a 440-4bbl car.

[Rocco Barnard]

I had a 70 Charger R/T SE (top banana hardtop, V21, Tan leather interior....man I wish I kept the car) where the licensing/registation unit made a mistake on the title....they had a V instead of the correct U in the VIN. I could have used the messed up title to essentially create a six pack car....I didn't....and it was ultimately restored correctly as a 440-4bbl car.

So far I've been watching this thread from a distance, its been as much about historical facts as it has been a mystery.  Generally, I don't believe anything I read, and only half of what I hear. There's always another side of the story, and as of now all of the information has not been collected.  MCG has been notorious for embellishing stories. I'm not saying they've done so in this example,  but for the record I don't take what I read in that magazine as Gospel fact.  If they published the inspection report they would have more credibility on what was actually written.

I'll also tell you that I despise reproduction documentation in this hobby.  Documentation should be just that - "Documentation"!  Nobody should be allowed to recreate factory documentation to 99.5% of its original appearance to the point where it can even fool experts. That's just wrong, and there's no reason for it in this hobby. I don't know why ECS came on board with his revelation but he has.  I guess it was done to expose fakes in the hobby.  Although one would still have to wonder why since his reproduction of factory VIN documentation is considered the best, and hardest to verify as not being factory original.

I don't think ECS intentionally tried to deceive anyone by making this door VIN decal, that's what he does for a living.  If we see proof that VIN number on the door decal has been changed,  I still wouldn't find ECS culpable as he might well have been duped by phony documents coming in.  Garbage in, garbage out sort of speak. What I'm trying to express is that it's become way to easy for people to fool others, and get fooled themselves with incorrect documentation. Funny thing is, today is April Fool's day but I digress.  There's nothing funny about faking classic cars.

Whenever people point the finger at something as being fake in this hobby, who's to blame?  Is it the person who manufactured and sold the reproduction documentation, or the person who either tries to convince others their item is authentic, or worse yet, sells the known non-authentic item to someone else with the intent to deceive?  That's up to us to decide in the hobby.  It's been going on in sports memorabilia, and other collecting for years. For many years car magazine writers expressed these same issues and concerns with reproduction documentation.  These door vin stickers, fender tags, vin plates, etc, copies have gotten so good they are nearly impossible to detect as not being an original.  Now the time has come that even some experts could have been fooled such as this case.

There should be a clearer way to detect these reproduction tags, dash plates, or vin decals from an original in my opinion. As someone eluded to before, what prevents the person (in the case of the Six Pack Charger) from acquiring a reproduction broadcast sheet with all the correct build codes for a six pack with air conditioning and cruise control, then  presenting that with the other documents for this Charger?   It would sure make this whole mess a lot worse and harder to nail down.  Reproduction broadcasts sheets are now being produced, and they are so well made, they have also fooled experts.  Just do some research on any mopar forum and you will find a stories like these.

The problem started sometime before ECS made the decal.  This was an original paint car. It appears to have never been in an accident.  Why did it need a new door vin decal, why has the EPA emission engine identification sticker been removed from the fender apron? There is an obvious explanation for this and its not a good one!  I won't point blame to ECS specifically, because as I said, they may have been duped. The question remains for us to consider - is it too easy to get vin related articles and broadcast sheet documents made these days?   I say yes.  Long before much of this went high tech, most people in the hobby only required a pencil rubbing of the dash VIN plate or fender tag to validate a vehicle - oh have the times changed!

I don't know where it goes from here.  Does the current owner come on to defend or not?  Will he dispute the facts?  Will someone else two owners removed come on to say something else to the contrary?  Or does an owner 25 years ago say something else?  Where does it end? Today's collectors must now employ more experts, and have more checks and balances in place before considering what's being presented as factory documentation. Manufactures of these items need to show something identifiable on their reproductions so they are not confused as originals.

[XS29L9Bxxxxxx]

Manufactures of these items need to show something identifiable on their reproductions so they are not confused as originals.

My is that will never happen, as that's not why people buy reproduction docs.   

[familymopar]

I'll also tell you that I despise reproduction documentation in our hobby.  Documentation should be just that - "Documentation"!  Nobody should be allowed to recreate "factory documentation" to 99.5% of its original appearance to the point where it can even fool experts. That's just wrong, and there's no reason for it in this hobby. I don't know why ECS came on board with his revelation but he has.  I guess it was done to expose fakes in the hobby.  Although one would still have to wonder why since his reproduction of factory VIN documentation is considered the best, and hardest to verify as not being factory original.

I don't think ECS intentionally tried to deceive anyone by making this door VIN decal, that's what he does for a living.  If we see proof that VIN number on the door decal has been changed,  I still wouldn't find ECS culpable as he might well have been duped by phony documents coming in.  Garbage in, garbage out sort of speak. What I'm trying to express is that it's become way to easy for people to fool others, and get fooled themselves with incorrect documentation. Funny thing is, today is April Fool's day but I digress.  There's nothing funny about faking classic cars.

I agree completely.  I hate reproduction documentation.  I don't have a door vin sticker on my car and I don't want to reproduce one.  Too much chance for impropriety when I am one day out of this car's life.  What I have of real documentation is what I have.  And for me, as I have said before, once one piece of evidence is shown to be fake, all other evidence loses credibility with me. I do not want to risk someone thinking the same of my car one day.

All that being said, ECS is providing a service that there is obviously a market for.  If not ECS then someone else.  It is legal (it is arguable as to whether it should be) and it apparently has the blessing of Chrysler Corp, the DMV , and other regulatory agencies (again, we can debate whether it should be).  Therefore, while I wish that fakes were not an option, they are, and I will not condemn ECS for filling a niche that would be filled by someone.

Maybe I am naive, and I am certainly new to a lot of the personalities on this board, but it has seemed obvious to me so far why ECS came on board. There was a car we were all questioning and he came on with possibly the most relevant information so far.  "Hey guys, I made that sticker, here is when, and here is what I have available to prove it."  (The quotes here are for demonstrative purposes and do not represent an actual quote by ECS).  This sticker made it through an expert that people on this thread were recommended as one of the best to the OP.  That is scary.  Just as scary is if ECS had been of the  mind to sit back and revel in the fact that his creation fooled such an expert.  But no, ECS told us all to halt and explained the history of the sticker.  I for one am appreciative of that.  Someone else who could have filled the niche ECS filled may have not done so and sat back and laughed at all of us.  So, even though I do not like the fake stickers, broadcast sheets, fender tags, etc., at least this guy has his ear to the rail and popped up when one of his stickers were being used as evidence of originality.

I also agree that ECS was not intentionally trying to fool anyone.  Heck, he had already done that.  All he had to do was not pipe up.  But he did.

There should be a clearer way to detect these reproduction tags, dash plates, or vin decals from an original in my opinion. As someone eluded to before, what prevents the person (in the case of the Six Pack Charger) from acquiring a reproduction broadcast sheet with all the correct build codes for a six pack with air conditioning and cruise control, then  presenting that with the other documents for this Charger?   It would sure make this whole mess a lot worse and harder to nail down.  Reproduction broadcasts sheets are now being produced, and they are so well made, they have also fooled experts.  Just do some research on any mopar forum and you will find a stories like these.

I could not agree anymore.  If there are going to be fakes then they should clearly identify themselves.  The only reason not to do this is if you intend to fool people.  And obviously that is not a good reason.  But it can not be left to self regulation.  Let's say ECS gets on here and says "Ok guys, I think y'all are right.  I've thought long and hard about it and from now on my stickers will be recognizable as reproductions by ___________".  Well great.  We will all know when ECS created a sticker from now in.  And ECS has just created another niche market for the next guy who does not feel constrained to do this.  All the regulatory agencies that license and approve of what ECS is doing should do this themselves.  The DMV and others have very little interest in the integrity of the collector or classic car market.  But Chrysler should certainly impose such a regulation.  And maybe I am wrong, I suppose this kind of reproduction could possibly lead to two cars with the same vin, and there DMV would be very interested as that could create quite a cluster.  It seems like an easy fix though.  Someone just has to fix it and I think the problem may be low on the radar of the agencies involved.

The problem started sometime before ECS made the decal.  This was an original paint car. It appears to have never been in an accident.  Why did it need a new door vin decal, why has the EPA emission engine identification sticker been removed from the fender apron? There is an obvious explanation for this and its not a good one!  I won't point blame to ECS specifically, because as I said, they may have been duped. The question remains for us to consider - is it too easy to get vin related articles and broadcast sheet documents made these days?   I say yes.  Long before much of this went high tech, most people in the hobby only required a pencil rubbing of the dash VIN plate or fender tag to validate a vehicle - oh have the times changed!

I don't know where it goes from here.  Does the current owner comes on to defend or not?  Will he dispute the facts?  Will someone else two owners removed come on to say something else to the contrary?  Or does an owner 25 years ago say something else?  Where does it end? Today's collectors must now employ more experts, and have more checks and balances in place before considering what's being presented as factory documentation. Manufactures of these items need to show something identifiable on their reproductions so they are not confused as originals.

Again I agree.  Why is the original vin sticker and the emissions sticker gone?  It seems odd given the state of the car that they were removed.  They should be present even if very degraded.  By the same token, why did someone purposefully age the new sticker or even put it on pre-restoration?  There is only one reason for that that I can think of.  The fender tag has been removed from the vehicle since we first saw it to now in the most recent video.  Did OP remove it?  Why?  There are plenty of reasons to remove the fender tag, and it is easy enough to take on and off unlike the stickers, but it is still strange to me. OP was not aware of the rarity / issues with the car when he first came here asking about his silver vin plate, so I doubt it was off to be put in his safe.  Was it given to him already removed when he received the car?  And if so, why was it removed from a car that was rotting in a field for 25 years?  The fender tag being removed is not uncommon and there are plenty of fair reasons to do so, it just seems odd to me in this instance.

[familymopar]

I don't know where it goes from here.  Does the current owner comes on to defend or not?  Will he dispute the facts?  Will someone else two owners removed come on to say something else to the contrary?  Or does an owner 25 years ago say something else?  Where does it end? Today's collectors must now employ more experts, and have more checks and balances in place before considering what's being presented as factory documentation. Manufactures of these items need to show something identifiable on their reproductions so they are not confused as originals.

I would love to hear from the current owner and previous owners, but I doubt we will.  The current owner may be holding on to plausible deniability as he has the stamp of approval from a well regarded expert (not to insinuate anything nefarious to the current owner, I don't know him and can not judge him).  But for him to know ECS's information (and a future owner being able to prove that he knew ECS's information) puts him in an odd position where it would be difficult to claim authenticity based on an expert who authenticated a sticker we have good reason to believe is a reproduction.  The OP owner doesn't have a dog in the fight and may have no interest.  The pre-OP owner, who had the car in a field for 25 years may have very little interest and may be unaware this board exists.  When he bought that car it was just a car.  It would certainly liven up the thread, but I won't hold my breath.

[TUFCAT]

   Let me just say this... I agree with Familymopar on everything he said!  

[ECS]

I don't know why ECS came on board with his revelation but he has.  I guess it was done to expose fakes in the hobby.  Although one would still have to wonder why since his reproduction of factory VIN documentation is considered the best, and hardest to verify as not being factory original.

I'll be happy to answer "why" I came on here.  I saw the article in MCG.  While talking to a Friend about the decal mentioned in the article, he told me about this thread and forwarded it to me.  Just like in the article, the VIN decal posted here was also said to be the original.  I couldn't change what had been written in MCG but I could provide some insight on this Forum.

We specialize in making reproduction labels/decals that look original.  If they looked incorrect, we would be ridiculed for offering "inferior" products.  Restoring a car means putting it back to its original state.  If you had a vehicle repaired at a Collision Center, would you want the parts to look like they did prior to the accident or for your car to look different?  Would you be happy with a Repair Facility that didn't match the original paint color or replace your interior with pieces and components that didn't look original?  Of course not!  Our mission statement is to provide our Customers with items that emulate what their vehicle originally came with.  

One last point.  We do not compromise the quality of our products based on the devious actions of fraudulent individuals.  Would anyone expect a Sporting Goods Store to discontinue selling Baseball Bats because criminals use them as a weapon of choice?  Should the U.S. Treasury stop manufacturing Money because criminals counterfeit it?  Should Famous Barr stop selling Wedding Cutlery because warped individuals might use the knives to stab people?  If you stop manufacturing products based on what criminals might do, EVERYTHING manufactured will ultimately be discontinued to keep crooks from using legitimate products in an illegal manner.  

[ECS]

I won't point blame to ECS specifically, because as I said, they may have been duped.

Of all the scams that have been disclosed since we were approved to manufacture VIN products, ECS has never been responsible for initiating or causing "deception".  Any problems were ultimately found to originate "upstream".  We have no way of controlling a DOT Title Company from issuing a legitimate Title to a "fake" car.  If a real Title that has been issued from false documentation and used to have a legitimate VIN plate manufactured, we have no control over that.  As I stated earlier, the process is only as strong as it's weakest link.

[Dodge Don]

Shooting the messenger is wrong. Dave/ECS makes good products to meet the demands of the hobby (the people who want/buy his products). If he didn't do them someone else would and likely with lower integrity standards.

[cdr]

THANK YOU ECS 

[ECS]

Reproduction broadcasts sheets are now being produced, and they are so well made, they have also fooled experts......is it too easy to get vin related articles and broadcast sheet documents made these days?

A quick story about some of the Broadcast Sheets that Chrysler had originally approved for us to offer to the Industry.  Without disclosing names, there was a Restoration Company and another individual who got caught in their own web of deceit because they were not the "experts" that they thought.  The Restoration guy circled electrical items on the Broadcast Sheet that would have been specific to the sheets that were taped to the Glove Box.  The reason the Broadcast Sheet on the Glove Box has those codes circled is because it pertains to options like the Radio, Dash Instrument configuration, etc.......  They circled the dash options and then put the Broadcast Sheet in a Seat to make "spring marks" in the paper!  There would NEVER be a Glove Box Broadcast Sheet that exhibited Seat Spring marks!  BUSTED......!

Here's another hilarious story along the same lines. Broadcast Sheets that are adhered to the Glove Box usually exhibit remnants of masking tape where they are/were secured to the glove box lining.  This particular person put the tape remnants on the reproduction Broadcast Sheet and then stuffed it in a rear seat to obtain "spring mark"s in the paper.  A Broadcast Sheets found in the rear seats would never have "glove box tape" stuck to it.  I guess this person got caught up in trying to REALLY make it look original.  The reality is that they had no inkling about what they were trying to perpetrate.  Their ignorance concerning Broadcast Sheets got them......BUSTED!  It's too bad these crooks don't do something they are qualified to do like sweeping bathroom floors at the YMCA.   

[Y1CHARGER]

Many have been asking why would someone do all this with the VIN tags to an unrestored car but keep in mind that a con man is looking for a big score and the prices of the cars in 2006-2007 were sky high and the prices were going up and up.  The same year the door tag was made, 2006.  
Because of this the price tags on project cars like a six pack car were getting a premium and sometimes bought by non car guys with money and not a lot of knowledge wanting to flip it later and thus the scam / con men were jumping in.

[ECS]

THANK YOU ECS 

The "THANKS" goes out to all of you in the Industry!  You all are the BEST!   

[familymopar]

Many have been asking why would someone do all this with the VIN tags to an unrestored car but keep in mind that a con man is looking for a big score and the prices of the cars in 2006-2007 were sky high and the prices were going up and up.  The same year the door tag was made, 2006. 
Because of this the price tags on project cars like a six pack car were getting a premium and sometimes bought by non car guys with money and not a lot of knowledge wanting to flip it later and thus the scam / con men were jumping in.

I think that people have been asking that somewhat rhetorically, as if to say what legitimate reason would someone have to do this?  If that question can not be answered satisfactorily, then we are free to infer the only obvious reason, and what has been implied all along, which is that it must have been done for illegitimate purposes, such as what you described.

[resq302]

Going back and looking at the fender tag, I can spot one obvious difference.

Here is one of the 69 GTX that Dad has which we are currently restoring.  Granted, the screws that hold the tag are in place and his car was built at the St. Louis plant but if you look at where the x part of the head is for the screws that hold the tag to the inner fender, that area is dead center where the hole should be.  Look at how it lines up compared to the holes in the tag on the "6 pack" car.  The outside edge of the holes are not "even" with the edge of the letter but out past the end of the row.  Granted, I did not spot this at first since I am not going over this car tooth and nail to purchase it, but isn't this one of the tell-tale signs of a repro tag?  

[TUFCAT]

Look closely at the right side screw hole and you can see a shadow underneath the tag. Its throwing off the "alignment" in that photo.....take away the shadow and it looks pretty well aligned to me.  

[ws23rt]

Many have been asking why would someone do all this with the VIN tags to an unrestored car but keep in mind that a con man is looking for a big score and the prices of the cars in 2006-2007 were sky high and the prices were going up and up.  The same year the door tag was made, 2006. 
Because of this the price tags on project cars like a six pack car were getting a premium and sometimes bought by non car guys with money and not a lot of knowledge wanting to flip it later and thus the scam / con men were jumping in.

I think that people have been asking that somewhat rhetorically, as if to say what legitimate reason would someone have to do this?  If that question can not be answered satisfactorily, then we are free to infer the only obvious reason, and what has been implied all along, which is that it must have been done for illegitimate purposes, such as what you described.

People have been asking the question (me included).  And since it has been rhetorical indicates that it is obvious to all what faking plates, stickers, broadcast sheets, etc. is for.

It may be legal as it is done and the fact that the DMV accepts it does not change what it does to the hobby in the long run.  It's a dilution of the value of our cars in general.  Not unlike printing money which dilutes it's value.

[resq302]

So, hypothetically, a piece of paper which essentially was a piece of garbage and people were too lazy to throw away and hid somewhere inside the vehicle is now a valuable collectors item.  Add to that, that not every vehicle had one "hid" inside the vehicle so you may not even have anything to go on.  Whats worse is that even IF you did get one in your car, didn't mean it would be the one for your car.  So, to add to this mess, does an inaccurate build sheet in your car add value to it even though it does not have the VIN number for your car.   Did I confuse anyone yet? 

[ECS]

It may be legal......

So many people talk about legalities but here are the DMV facts.

750.415 Concealing or misrepresenting identity of motor vehicle or mechanical device as misdemeanor or felony; evidence of violation; confiscation; sale at public auction; revocation of dealer's license; vehicle identification plate and applicable labels; motor vehicle or part with identification number removed.

Sec. 415. A person shall not knowingly possess, buy, deliver, or offer to buy, sell, exchange, or give away any manufacturer's vehicle identification number plate, federal safety certification label, antitheft label, posident die stamps, secretary of state vehicle identification label, rosette rivet, or any facsimile thereof. This subsection does not apply to a motor vehicle manufacturer, a motor vehicle parts supplier under contract with a motor vehicle manufacturer, or a law enforcement officer in the official performance of his or her duties or to a motor vehicle in which a manufacturer's vehicle identification plate and each of the applicable labels listed in this subsection have been installed as prescribed by law. A person who violates this subsection is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment for not more than 4 years, a fine of not more than $10,000.00, or both. If the person who violates this subsection is a licensed dealer or repair facility, its license shall be revoked.

[XS29L9Bxxxxxx]

So, hypothetically, a piece of paper which essentially was a piece of garbage and people were too lazy to throw away and hid somewhere inside the vehicle is now a valuable collectors item.  Add to that, that not every vehicle had one "hid" inside the vehicle so you may not even have anything to go on.  Whats worse is that even IF you did get one in your car, didn't mean it would be the one for your car.  So, to add to this mess, does an inaccurate build sheet in your car add value to it even though it does not have the VIN number for your car.   Did I confuse anyone yet? 

By inaccurate, do you mean a build sheet from another car? If it doesn't have YOUR VIN, it has no bearing or value for YOUR car 

FWIW, most auto assy plants still use paper, printed build sheets, and most are tossed away as they pass each station. I think the Corvette guys, and perhaps Camaro guys, are the only ones lucky enough to have workers save a few, placing them in pockets and trunks.

[Rocco Barnard]

A build sheet, or broadcast sheet is unique piece of history whether or not it's considered factory trash. The reality of the situation in the real world, a build sheet adds value when money changes hands.  By itself it's not the holy grail of documentation, but it helps to validate/verify/authenticate a restored car beyond its fender tag, VIN tag, window sticker etc., and that makes a car more valuable.

Many times a build sheet can also help a second, third, fourth owner, etc. to prove what options, stripes, were correct to the car if previous owners changed these items. Not all options are on the fender tag.  The build sheet has always been accepted as a factory document to prove how the vehicle left the assembly line (factory mis-builds excluded). This is more of a reason to respect the document.

I agree they were never intended to be considered documentation at first but as time went on they become a necessary piece of the documentation trail making our cars more desirable, marketable, and even higher scoring in some judging events whether appropriate or not.  That's not for me to decide.

It's refreshing to see ECS is upfront and honest with the issue. If anybody has a doubt they could contact ECS to verify his records to determine if an item is reproduction or not. MCG certainly should have checked.  As time goes by dishonest people will continue to find more ways to be dishonest with these cars. This Charger Six Pack with A/C story may become more proof of dishonesty depending on how things pan out.  I don't think anybody was asking ECS to stop making reproductions just because there's dishonest people. This is why I merely suggested reproduction documents to be marked in an inconspicuous location to show what they really are. Extra copies, reissues, or replacements of original items.  

[bill440rt]

So, hypothetically, a piece of paper which essentially was a piece of garbage and people were too lazy to throw away and hid somewhere inside the vehicle is now a valuable collectors item.  Add to that, that not every vehicle had one "hid" inside the vehicle so you may not even have anything to go on.  Whats worse is that even IF you did get one in your car, didn't mean it would be the one for your car.  So, to add to this mess, does an inaccurate build sheet in your car add value to it even though it does not have the VIN number for your car.   Did I confuse anyone yet? 

You may have just confused yourself. 

There nothing hypothetical about it.
Fixed: "A piece of paper, which essentially was a piece of garbage and people were too lazy to throw away and hid somewhere inside the vehicle, is now a valuable collectors item to which the car it belongs to."      

[familymopar]

It may be legal......

So many people talk about legalities but here are the DMV facts.

750.415 Concealing or misrepresenting identity of motor vehicle or mechanical device as misdemeanor or felony; evidence of violation; confiscation; sale at public auction; revocation of dealer's license; vehicle identification plate and applicable labels; motor vehicle or part with identification number removed.

Sec. 415. A person shall not knowingly possess, buy, deliver, or offer to buy, sell, exchange, or give away any manufacturer's vehicle identification number plate, federal safety certification label, antitheft label, posident die stamps, secretary of state vehicle identification label, rosette rivet, or any facsimile thereof. This subsection does not apply to a motor vehicle manufacturer, a motor vehicle parts supplier under contract with a motor vehicle manufacturer, or a law enforcement officer in the official performance of his or her duties or to a motor vehicle in which a manufacturer's vehicle identification plate and each of the applicable labels listed in this subsection have been installed as prescribed by law. A person who violates this subsection is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment for not more than 4 years, a fine of not more than $10,000.00, or both. If the person who violates this subsection is a licensed dealer or repair facility, its license shall be revoked.

It should just be said here that this is Michigan law and only pertains to Michigan.  Although it is similar to the Federal law and likely similar to most state laws, there are also likely some variations so people should check their own state laws, and if you are shipping between states you are under the jurisdiction of both state's laws.

I know, for example, that the laws concerning rosette rivets vary a little from state to state (i.e. possession vs possession with an intent to defraud, etc.).  Depending on laws I've seen quoted on various forums concerning rivets could certainly land one in hot water.

That being said I have a hard time imagining a reproduction vin sticker being illegal in any state.  But I don't know for a fact.  Nonetheless, if someone were googling for these things and ran into this thread, they should simply be forewarned to check their own state law as Michigan law has nothing to do with anyone outside of Michigan.

I am certain ECS is well aware of this as this is their industry.  I am not aiming this post at ECS.  It is just a general disclaimer that if you are not in Michigan check for yourself, as with everything else.