STANDUP' Gen Lee for sale on Ebay.........

[68charger383]

so your saying the ex/wife didn't sell it out from under him?.

California is a 50/50 state so the car was hers to sell

Well it depends if they were married at the time he first acquired the car. Actually if the title was in his name only and they were married at the time he got the car, she would have to petition the court to have the item sold. Technically, she could not sign off on the title herself just because they were married, plus, per the articles, she was not on the title. The bankruptcy filing should have prevented any sale since the trustee would have had to have approved the sale of the car. Bottomline, legally the whole scenario surrounding the car does not seem right!

[ChgrSteve67]

If you are dumb enought to buy a car without paperwork, fail to get the appropriate paperwork for 20+ years and travel around the country with it you deserve to have it taken back by the origional owner.

Lucky he didn't go to jail.

Steve

[FastbackJon]

This was a salvage car, rich never had a title. And from my understanding, he owed his wife money, couldn't pay the bills, the car was seized by the state as an asset and given to her. Nothing I can see that is illegal about that.

It would be like if you built this cool house and lived in it and then quit paying the mortgage for a few months, the bank comes and takes the house and kicks you out, puts it up for auction. Then 20 years go by and you miss your house and so you generate a bunch of paperwork that says you still own it. So you pay for the current unsuspecting residents to go on a nice vacation and while they are away you break in, move all their stuff out, and start living there as if you never left.

[moparstuart]

  take the car from him and send him to jail

    heck hang the dam car thief

[RD]

This was a salvage car, rich never had a title. And from my understanding, he owed his wife money, couldn't pay the bills, the car was seized by the state as an asset and given to her. Nothing I can see that is illegal about that.

salvage car or not, the car legally belonged to him.  There are things called "salvage titles" and are just as legal as any other title.

you say the car was seized by the state and given to his wife.  Where is your proof?  Rich had a federal judge's court order for his proof, where is yours?

The dude who bought the car, IMO is a lowlife, sorry, just my opinion.  Then again, opinion's are like a$$holes, so take that for what its worth.

[Charger_Fan]

Do like they did with that Barry Bonds ball a few years ago. The court ordered it auctioned off and split it between both parties. That would solve everything.

Perfect.

[blackcharger]

as sands thru the hour glass.............

[FastbackJon]

This was a salvage car, rich never had a title. And from my understanding, he owed his wife money, couldn't pay the bills, the car was seized by the state as an asset and given to her. Nothing I can see that is illegal about that.

salvage car or not, the car legally belonged to him.  There are things called "salvage titles" and are just as legal as any other title.

you say the car was seized by the state and given to his wife.  Where is your proof?  Rich had a federal judge's court order for his proof, where is yours?

The dude who bought the car, IMO is a lowlife, sorry, just my opinion.  Then again, opinion's are like a$$holes, so take that for what its worth.

Tsk, tsk... someone hasn't been following along, you need to go back and re-read what the courts decided about who legally owns what. Once you get that figured out the rest is clear and you see who the lowlifes really are.

Your information on the "title" is wrong as well. Rich had a salvage "certificate" which is not a title. He got the certificate in California in October 1982, which clearly states "This Salvage Certificate is evidence that titling documents for the above described vehicle have been surrendered to DMV." Signed by Richard Sephton.

I'm no rocket scientist, but it appears to me that Sephton signed paperwork that specifically says he never did have any kind of title to the car.

[ChgrSteve67]

Everything has ownership papers. If you are dumb enought to buy someting without proof of ownership then..........

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/howto/htvr16.htm
A Salvage Certificate is issued instead of an ownership certificate for a total loss salvage vehicle and becomes the ownership document.

[ChgrSteve67]

It would be like if you built this cool house and lived in it and then quit paying the mortgage for a few months, the bank comes and takes the house and kicks you out, puts it up for auction. Then 20 years go by and you miss your house and so you generate a bunch of paperwork that says you still own it. So you pay for the current unsuspecting residents to go on a nice vacation and while they are away you break in, move all their stuff out, and start living there as if you never left.

Your telling me that you would buy a house and not transfer the title or dead of that property you purchased into your name?
And give money to someone that didn't give you a bill of sale or prove they owned it to sell?

Have seen news reports on people that move into an unoccupied house put it up for sale, sell the house take the money and split.
When the new owner goes to title the house they find it didn't belong to the person they bought it from.

Guess who owns the house today.

The origional owner.

[Mike DC]

Actually if the title was in his name only and they were married at the time he got the car, she would have to petition the court to have the item sold. Technically, she could not sign off on the title herself just because they were married, plus, per the articles, she was not on the title. The bankruptcy filing should have prevented any sale since the trustee would have had to have approved the sale of the car. Bottomline, legally the whole scenario surrounding the car does not seem right!

THIS IS EXACTLY THE POINT!


So many of the criticisms of Rich's ownership . . . I keep hearing versions of this same argument: 
"If it was really HIS at the time, then how could his wife have sold it in the first place?"


That's exactly the point!  She DIDN'T sell it, legally!  She basically just handed the car over to someone, took their money, and ran! 


The California court ruled (many years ago) that his wife had no right to sell it at the time she did. 
Everything since then became secondary once that original incident was ruled "illegal."

She sold it against the court's wishes and without properly transferring Rich's ownership paperwork for the car to the new owner.
Rich still has the ownership paperwork for the car, and whatever paperwork the Batches have on the car has not been able to stand up in court to change that. 
At least as far as I know.

 

[Stroker ACE]

hi guys,

First off let me formerly introduce myself. I am Bryan Batch's brother in law and since he is currently out of town he has asked me to post for him.

  Ok here is the deal with the car as of May 2007 the car is Legally Kaye's.  The courts had decided that the car did not belong to Sephton yrs ago. The title he displays and claims to be legal was voided in the early 90's I believe.  It's been awhile since I dealt with the case so dates are not coming to me.  And if you want to read anymore into that I will see if I can get the info needed to do so after my bro gets back. 

  I have been bitting my tongue for so long but for all of the guys who think they know the true story on this car I have seen the documents that back all of our claims and they are all legal court documents.  And I could totally trash Rich on here with stuff that would make your jaws hit the floor but I won't because the poor guy has passed and I just won't bash on him in respect.  But he wasn't the honest guy you all have thought he was.

I hate that my return to this board was this but I needed to post about this.

ACE

[TUFCAT]

Stroker, that was well written, and no offense to the others who posted to the contrary ...but that story was pretty close to the version I heard.  I was also biting my tongue..... (and by the way, I could care less about this case and would STILL NEVER EVER SPEND A DIME for a car surrounded in so much controversy) - - to me, owning this car can't end well for the new buyer.  Can you imagine how much attention (good and bad) it will bring?   Also, its sad too that Rich has passed,  we won't get his version, and its probably for the best anyhow. 

[70charger_boy]

hi guys,

First off let me formerly introduce myself. I am Bryan Batch's brother in law and since he is currently out of town he has asked me to post for him.

  Ok here is the deal with the car as of May 2007 the car is Legally Kaye's.  The courts had decided that the car did not belong to Sephton yrs ago. The title he displays and claims to be legal was voided in the early 90's I believe.  It's been awhile since I dealt with the case so dates are not coming to me.  And if you want to read anymore into that I will see if I can get the info needed to do so after my bro gets back. 

  I have been bitting my tongue for so long but for all of the guys who think they know the true story on this car I have seen the documents that back all of our claims and they are all legal court documents.  And I could totally trash Rich on here with stuff that would make your jaws hit the floor but I won't because the poor guy has passed and I just won't bash on him in respect.  But he wasn't the honest guy you all have thought he was.

I hate that my return to this board was this but I needed to post about this.

ACE

I appreciate you commenting on this I know it must be hard.  i'm on your side.  As far as Rich's character you don'y have to say anything.  He proved it by setting up a ruse to steal the car.  I will say again that any general he built would've been worth money with his name attached.  He should've closed the chapter on the stand up general and built another one.

[Mike DC]

 
Stroker ACE,


I finally blew up a minute ago because this thread debate was hanging up on a point that it should not have been. 


If you've really got new info to add to this (like a newer California ruling about Rich's ownership than what he was acting on when he repo'd car in Indy), then I'm all ears.

 

[DodgeChargerNeeded]

Gee I wonder how long it will be before this friendly little thread gets locked.

[Stroker ACE]

Ok,  this is the second time I am writing this post. First one was directed at Mike but I am not going to do that.

Before I say anymore or go any further let me talk to Bryan later this week when he returns from his trip.  I know at one time he wanted to get everything posted online to show the true story about the car in regards of the court docs and what all went on.  So maybe I can work on that with him and finally build a site with it all.  Until then I will see about getting some stuff to finally back up what really happened.

A couple of things I want to say for right now.  I personally have no interest in the car.  I think all of this was BS from the get go because I loved that car. And for the guys who haven't seen the car in person you are truely missing something special.

I am only getting involved in this mess again is because Bryan is family and I don't want his name run threw the mud because people have been mis informed of facts.

As of May Bryan does not have any interest in the car.

The selling of this car is not related to Rich's death. I can't say why she is selling it but I do know that it isn't because of that.

And in my opinion it should go to a museum somewhere.

ACE

[69charger2002]

in my opinion someone should have been hired to list the car on ebay. that ad and pics are absolutely pathetic

[The70RT]

I totally agree for that kind of cabbage..........but I would think the buyer would have checked it out in person unless it was chumpchange to him

[FastbackJon]

Thanks for surfacing again ACE, it is nice to hear from you again. Been a while. I think a web page like you mentioned is a great idea to get all of the facts out there because of all the mis-information floating around. Bryan is definitely not the bad guy that the Dukes community it seems has pinned him as. He only did the same thing that any of them would have done if someone would have set them up and taken their Charger. Granted there will probably still be some die hards that won't quit until Rich is actually driving the wheelstander again, no matter how many current titles or ownership documents you have to display, but I think, err... I hope the web site would take care of most of them.

[ChgrSteve67]

Its always a shame when the laywers and courts get involved in things like this.
Seems like the only good that has come of it is the final determination of rightfull ownership.

Would be great to see the car put in a museum with the true story and all of the documentation displayed.
(Bet there is boxes and boxes of it)

Someone should write a screen play and make a movie.
Truth is always better than fiction.

Steve

[Mike DC]

 
I'm all for the truth too.  Whatever that may turn out to be.


For what it's worth, I'll say that Rich wasn't prone to specifically badmouthing the Batches whenever I talked to him about the Wheelstander. 
Of course he didn't exactly have warm feelings for them, whaddya expect.  But he wasn't one to go around telling ugly stories about the other owners to any DOH fan who'll listen.  His frustration seemed mainly directed at the court/legal system whenever I heard anything. 

[Sabre]

hi guys,

First off let me formerly introduce myself. I am Bryan Batch's brother in law and since he is currently out of town he has asked me to post for him.

  Ok here is the deal with the car as of May 2007 the car is Legally Kaye's.  The courts had decided that the car did not belong to Sephton yrs ago. The title he displays and claims to be legal was voided in the early 90's I believe.  It's been awhile since I dealt with the case so dates are not coming to me.  And if you want to read anymore into that I will see if I can get the info needed to do so after my bro gets back. 

  I have been bitting my tongue for so long but for all of the guys who think they know the true story on this car I have seen the documents that back all of our claims and they are all legal court documents.  And I could totally trash Rich on here with stuff that would make your jaws hit the floor but I won't because the poor guy has passed and I just won't bash on him in respect.  But he wasn't the honest guy you all have thought he was.

I hate that my return to this board was this but I needed to post about this.

ACE

I appreciate you commenting on this I know it must be hard.  i'm on your side.  As far as Rich's character you don'y have to say anything.  He proved it by setting up a ruse to steal the car.  I will say again that any general he built would've been worth money with his name attached.  He should've closed the chapter on the stand up general and built another one.

As Mike posted earlier, Rich didn't "steal" the car.

Richard found out through Travis that the car was coming to Indy in August, and furthermore, they knew where the car would be staying. That was all it took to get things rolling big-time. Richard contacted the Indianapolis Police Department and explained his situation to them, faxed them some of his paperwork, and was then instructed on what they needed to authorize a legal repossession of the car. What they got was a deluge of paperwork far in excess of what they requested. In fact, one of the senior auto theft officers assisting Richard informed him he'd never seen such an airtight case of ownership in his entire career. The Indy Police Department put Richard in contact with Consolidated Recovery, Inc. - the city's premier auto repossession company and the recommended team for the job.

[The70RT]

 

[Asephton]

Ok well..... Let me start by introducing myself, my name is Amanda Sephton. Yes that's right, I'm Rich's daughter. I'm going to start by saying that MOST people in this case are just flat out dead wrong about the "facts" surrounding this car. Bottom line is, my Mom's attorney took this car and sold it illegally. My mom says that she had nothing to do with it and never saw a penny from the sale. Which means the lawyer pocketed every bit of it. A federal court judge ordered that the car WAS IN FACT sold illegally for fees my Dad did not owe and the car to be retrned to my Dad. By the time that happened though, the car was gone and the dirtbag lawyer claimed he didn't know who the car was sold to or where it was. The FEDERAL court order clearly states in black and white that any order thereafter unless issued by the same court was NULL AN VOID. So you see, the car was taken illegally, sold illegally, and is currently in the hands of someone else other than my family, ILLEGALLY. Legal actions will be taken to see that car back in my family, you see I'm not the only one who knows that the car is my family's. Only problem is, it takes money. And as a 20 year old college student, I don't have any readly available. One day though, this wrong WILL be righted... If it's the last thing I do on God's green earth. That's a promise!!!!