Red flag this 69 Charger on eBay **UPDATE**

[ACUDANUT]

What we need is a grudge match.  Everyone show up with their lawyers. LOL

[TUFCAT]

What we need is a grudge match.  Everyone show up with their lawyers. LOL

Knight's lawyer....

[familymopar]

This thread is awesome.  We have a 69 Charger with an interesting, to say the least, numbers/tag issue and an ex-marine calling everyone else "schoolgirls" and keyboard cowboys while bragging about beating up his elderly neighbor by hitting him blind from behind and threatening to sue everyone on here.  This thread has it all!  The only things this thread is missing is literally 1) a girl in a bikini and 2) any basis for a lawsuit.

[TUFCAT]

This thread is awesome.  We have a 69 Charger with an interesting, to say the least, numbers/tag issue and an ex-marine calling everyone else "schoolgirls" and keyboard cowboys while bragging about beating up his elderly neighbor by hitting him blind from behind and threatening to sue everyone on here.  This thread has it all!  The only things this thread is missing is literally 1) a girl in a bikini and 2) any basis for a lawsuit.

Thanks Chuck, your input is always appreciated.  

Typically when under-educated legal experts like "Knight" start spewing what they know about the law, we find out their extent of knowledge is proportionate with the amount of time they've spent "in the system".  

Funny that most of these guys think the law works much differently than it actually does.  

[ws23rt]

I've read through this thread a couple of times and find it to be a real gem.
It started with what I think is the best reason for having this forum to begin with. ---To promote and preserve the hobby of collecting something of our passion.---What better way than to share a scam alert?

If we don't hear about the scammers that pollute the waters here than where have we to turn?
I have tried to (in my mind) in vision a down side to publicity about scamming. (I'm still working on that)

This thread also has a victim of what scammers cause.  It is lots of grief for every one down the line for the car in question from the start.

The victim of a scam (a victim perhaps by no fault of his own but never the less) comes on hear to express his situation about an issue we fight as a group.

I feel a bit confused by his complaint.    I get that he is hurt by the bad guys in the world.  I also get that he feels violated by the cops. (all the same thing--another topic-- and caused by the same crooks.).  So I get his need to vent-- but to come here and accuse our hobby as being part of the problem is over the top.

I still feel like a newbe here (even though I have posted a lot) but I come here because this place has many dedicated car folks that just want the best for each other and  our common passion.

This member--Knight--has come here and said his piece.   and then some.

That is another thing I like about this thread---He posted and the responses were appropriate and concise.

My hope is that we continue to eek out wherever fakery happens and let every one know about it.

[TUFCAT]

That is another thing I like about this thread---He posted and the responses were appropriate and concise.

My hope is that we continue to eek out wherever fakery happens and let every one know about it.

100% in agreement with ws23.  

[hemi-hampton]

 

[familymopar]

Thanks Chuck, your input is always appreciated.  

Typically when under-educated legal experts like "Knight" start spewing what they know about the law, we find out their extent of knowledge is proportionate with the amount of time they've spent "in the system".  

Funny that most of these guys think the law works much differently than it actually does.  

Sure Tufcat.  And it is, as the saying goes, that every inmate is a lawyer. In this situation, I suppose a few spins around the small claims court leaves one with the same feeling.  Nonetheless, it seems obvious to me that what Knight knows about "the law" could fit in a thimble, with room to spare.  

Because we have a litigious individual in our midst, I feel compelled to say that I am not an attorney in Florida, I offer no legal advice to anyone on this forum, nothing I say should be construed as legal advice and anyone with questions of their own should consult a licensed attorney.  In short, I gave my 6 year old google and offered him a quarter if he could disprove Knight's legal assertions.  3 minutes later I lost a quarter.

I've read through this thread a couple of times and find it to be a real gem.
It started with what I think is the best reason for having this forum to begin with. ---To promote and preserve the hobby of collecting something of our passion.---What better way than to share a scam alert?

If we don't hear about the scammers that pollute the waters here than where have we to turn?

I could not agree more.  This is a service of this forum and the registries that benefits the hobby.  It is unfortunate for Knight that when the music stopped he was the one left without a chair, but that is not the fault of anyone here, and dare I say, may have been prevented with some due diligence on his part.  Either way, his beef is with the seller of the car.  And now that the car has been sold again without the issue being resolved (properly) we are sure to hear of this car again.

[ECS]

Alaskan TA was the one running his mouth.......

I can empathize with you Knight.  You'll find that the empty Barrel makes the most noise.  These self proclaimed "Auto Police" are very similar to the character DOOFY in the spoof SCARY MOVIE.  They hold absolutely no jurisdiction in this Industry and use their imaginary "authority" as a bully pit to manipulate and promote their agenda.  If they genuinely cared about the Hobby, they would follow the proper channels to provide legitimacy to their "registration" services.  They hold no more authority in this Industry than your next door Neighbor. 

Please feel free to contact us if you ever need assistance with a scenario such as the one you encountered.  We don't charge a penny for pointing you in the right direction and personally know the top brass at the NICB.  They have contacted my Company numerous times to assist with their Investigations against real automotive criminals.  Unlike these other pretenders, we are PPAP certified, a Tier One supplier to the Automotive Industry and the only (secondary) Company licensed by the Auto Manufacturers to reproduce VIN related items.  The "new" FCA recently contacted us to take over their International programs for Both Fiat & Chrysler.  We don't shoot first and ask questions later.

www.ecsvin.com

[Knight]

ECS, you are one of few people on here who has posted something that makes sense or is helpful.  The part that nobody seems to get on here is that there NEVER was anything to show that the VIN had been swapped on this car.  The Holy Grail of proof is an ebay ad from 2007 where a mostly complete Charger was listed as a parts car in the parts car section.  The information that the VIN and fender tag were sold on ebay was FALSE, or at least has NEVER been presented.

When I listed this vehicle on ebay in 2010, I was told the VIN had been swapped.  I was gullible enough to believe it at first and immediately tried to get the facts.  NO ONE from here was able to provide me with any information.  It wasn't until law enforcement and the NICB arrived with the copy of the ebay ad from 2007 that I realized this was a witch hunt brought on by a bunch of half wits.

The fact that the body numbers came back as a 69 Coronet was interesting to say the least.  That is what lead to a third investigation from the DMV.  I parked my 69 Coronet next to the Charger and let him examine both cars (as I did for law enforcement and NICB).  That is why I was able to PROPERLY (threw that in there just for you  familymopar) go to court and get the title to the car.  The next owner was made FULLY aware of everything that transpired.

familymopar, I guess that shows that you and your 6yr old are on the same educational level.  You don't have to be a genius to know that maliciously posting false information about an individual identified by their name and telephone # on a public website makes you liable.

Which brings me to my poor, dumb, Ghoste.  I challenged you to come up with the actual facts on the VIN swapping and told you exactly where to find all of the information, but I suppose that was too difficult for you.  So, instead you find another story from a secondary source full of misinformation and run with it.  Hey, it was online so it must be true, right?   You haven't learned anything this whole time because YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID! 

The article you found was based on the police report written by his friends in the police dept.  Once again, I will give you an unbiased source to get the facts from.  Call the Ocala State Attorney's Office (352-671-5800) and find out how (according to you) a man can get away with blindsiding a senior citizen and nearly beating him to death while 3 firemen stand there watching and the whole thing is recorded on video.  Once again I am challenging you to put up or shut up.  Come back with the facts or don't come back at all.

[69CoronetRT]

deleted

[69CoronetRT]

The fact that the body numbers came back as a 69 Coronet was interesting to say the least.

And isn't the VIN and fender tag from a Hamtramck car? Coronets weren't built at Hamtramck. The only plant that built both '69 Chargers and Coronets was STL. Didn't you state in the e-mail to Chris the body numbers were 9G?

Doesn't that at least slightly suggest something fishy went on here?

[6bblgt]

Is it just the easily replaced upper radiator core support that has the G9 107228 stamping?  What's on the trunk lip?

Anyone have the pics from the 2007 eBay auction of XP29F9B236320?

[69CoronetRT]

Is it just the easily replaced upper radiator core support that has the G9 107228 stamping?  What's on the trunk lip?

So they run the body numbers from the trunk rail and core support (which matched), and they came back as a 69 Coronet.  

Page two. Body and core support are from a 69 STL built car 9G107228. VIN tag and fender tag are from a Hamtramck car 9B236320.

The part that nobody seems to get on here is that there NEVER was anything to show that the VIN had been swapped on this car.

[familymopar]

familymopar, I guess that shows that you and your 6yr old are on the same educational level.  You don't have to be a genius to know that maliciously posting false information about an individual identified by their name and telephone # on a public website makes you liable.

I appreciate that Knight, I also like to think my 6 year old is rather bright.  But let us look a little closer.

Let me first say that I think, and have thought throughout this thread, that is terribly unlikely that you yourself did anything wrong in regards to the car.  I also think that there is something fishy about the car and that should be brought to the attention of potential buyers on a forum like this.  All that aside, I only said anything to begin with because of how ridiculous some of your statements were on here.  Comparing members of this forum to rioters in Missouri (which has no relevance), telling us how you beat your neighbor (which has no relevance), and threatening to sue people here. 

I just read through this entire thread and I can not find where someone posted a fact that was incorrect.  Plenty of opinions, sure, but what you need is someone negligently or maliciously (back to that in a moment) posting a fact that is incorrect.

We have to look at this situation in 2 parts: 2010 and 2014.  In the entire 2010 portion I cannot find someone posting a fact that is incorrect.  Lots of opinions but nothing else.  You refer to your name and phone number which were posted as part of an email that you sent.  That alone doesn't get you there.  And I do not see a fact by that poster, or anyone else, that is incorrect. 

The burden of proof in a defamation suit depends on which of 3 categories the plaintiff falls into: private citizen, public figure, or limited-purpose public figure.  In 2010 there is no doubt that you were a private citizen.  Therefore, you would only have to prove negligence on the part of an alleged defamer.  Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that there was any actual defamation at all, but let's assume there was.  You then state in 2014 that the statute of limitations is tolled because the thread is still going (even though you yourself resurrected it).  This is simply false.  The statute of limitations in Florida for defamation is 2 years that began running when the post was made, or, at latest, when you first were aware of the posts.  This is because Florida, like most states, follows the "first publication rule".  Fortunately, in 2010 you reference the forums and your knowledge of it's existence.  So, even if there was any "legal" defamation in 2010, your claim to it is dead and gone.

Now we skip to 2014.  This is where I believe there is a solid claim that you became a limited-purpose public figure.  This is (very) generally when a private citizen thrusts themselves into the controversy.  There are a number of factors to consider, but your presence and statements on this thread seem to fit the bill (this is fact specific and only a judge can decide on each individual case).  When a plaintiff is a limited-purpose public figure, the plaintiff must then show that a speaker acted maliciously (as opposed to negligently).  As you used the word maliciously in your last post I will go ahead and tell you what that means in the legal sense.  "Maliciously" means that someone stated a fact about you that they KNEW was false.  That has not happened anywhere on this thread.  Nowhere.  Granted, I still can not find anyone posting an incorrect fact about you at all in the 2014 postings, but even if I could, it was not "maliciously".  I suppose the bit about you attacking a 65+ year old man from behind COULD maybe get there in a negligent sense (not in a malicious sense and certainly not if it is true), but there is an exception that someone may re-post something, not knowing it is false, that was in a news or public publication, which is where that comes from.  (I assume you are not disputing that you were a 38 year old Marine and he was some guy at least 65 years old and it is just the sneak attack portion that you take issue with.)

So, in 2010 there was no actual defamation but if there was you would be barred by the statute of limitations.  In 2014 there was no actual defamation but if there was you would likely have to prove that the speaker KNEW for a fact that what they were saying was false.

I am not even going to go in to the fact that you generally need actual damages (here "actual" means "money") and the multitude of other problems with your lawsuit threats.

It is an unfortunate fact that anyone can sue anyone for anything, but this would be a non-starter.  Contrary to what you think, you would be paying your own lawyers here and it is an expensive proposition to get an attorney to knowingly walk in a courtroom and get their pants pulled down.

So no,  "You don't have to be a genius to know that maliciously posting false information about an individual identified by their name and telephone # on a public website makes you liable".  You just have to know what that means and be at least as bright as my 6 year old.

Again, this is not legal advice and should not be construed as such.  Go consult a lawyer if you want legal advice.  I bought this information for a quarter.

[ECS]

ECS, you are one of few people on here who has posted something that makes sense or is helpful.

You'll find that most who are bashing you do not care one bit about the situation.  They simply want to advertise their infinite wisdom & knowledge about a topic they really know nothing about.  It doesn't affect them one iota.  If you correct them with information that only you know about, they will contrarily respond with adverse comments.  Had you posted the opposite of the scenario you originally offered here, they would be countering with the very argument that you are making now.  You say black, they say white and vice versa.  

I wouldn't worry about it or give it a second thought.  It sounds like the situation has reached an acceptable, legal conclusion and you did what you wanted with your vehicle.  It's funny how that is the advice everyone expresses until it infringes on their personal opinion.  Hypocrisy seems to be one of the finer attributes for those who live a life above and beyond reproach.

[Knight]

69CoronetRT, the trunk and core support numbers matched.  Those pieces were not swapped onto the Charger from a Coronet (not swapped at all in fact).  For the inspection of all 3 agencies, I parked my 69 Coronet next to the 69 Charger.  The guy from NICB went hog wild with the paint stripper trying to find some sign of panel replacement.  There was either a mistake in the records keeping, a mistake in the stamping from the plant or something along those lines.  

I was as cooperative as I could be during the investigations as I was interested in finding out the truth (unlike some people on here).  Truth be told, I had my hopes up of finding out the body numbers came back to a factory RT.  The car had RT badging, bucket seats, the 1yr only? 4 piston caliper disc brakes, and some other things that I can't remember now that made me think it was more than a 318 car.  All of those parts could have obviously been swapped, but it was peculiar to say the least.

Like I said before, if these cars should be scrapped because of a mistake, then that 1 of 1 brown Superbird and the factory 4dr Hemi Coronet in the Garlits museum as well as any other freak car should be scrapped.  That just seems like a very counter productive attitude from people claiming their intent is to preserve the hobby.

Hey, what do I know?  I'm just an uneducated inmate who swaps VINs and attacks senior citizens from behind according to the Gods on here for which I am unworthy to serve.

familymopar- I have watched the 2 lawyers filing motions back and forth in my current civil case.  One thinks the case has no basis and says it should be dropped and cites case law to back it up.  The other feels the case is strong enough to take on a contingency fee basis and backs the strength of the case up with more case law.  Either way I think I would trust a lawyer before I would trust your 6yr old on Google.  Especially when you say no false statements were made.  The original statement that the VIN and fender tag were sold on ebay was FALSE!  If you missed that in the 10 times I have mentioned it, then you need to accompany your 6yr old to school, or at least get Hooked on Phonics.

[ECS]

........a very counter productive attitude from people claiming their intent is to preserve the hobby..........The original statement that the VIN and fender tag were sold on ebay was FALSE!  If you missed that in the 10 times I have mentioned it..........

While it's very kind of you to continue sharing this information, you will ultimately find that you are wasting your time.  On two separate occasions, I came here to do EXACTLY what these "Mopar Police" say they want for this Hobby.  They claim they want the integrity of the Cars to be maintained and documented in an honest manner.  Sure they do!  

The first car exposed was a White 1969 Daytona that was PROVEN to have a "fake" reproduction Broadcast Sheet and a "fake" reproduction Fender Tag.  The same hypocrites who are giving you trouble came to the DEFENSE of the shysters who were lying about the fake VIN documentation of that White/Red Stripe 1969 Daytona.  Since the car was restored & owned by two of their Fraternal Members, they tried to shift the blame while defending the two who were attempting to perpetuate the fraud.  

The other Car was a 1970 Green Charger that had "supposedly" came from the Factory with a 440 Six Pack and Air Conditioning.  The VIN Decal was a "fake" reproduction along with the "fake" Fender Tag and "fake" Dash VIN plate.  The same garbage ensued.  Instead of holding the "expert" responsible that certified the car as being "real", they tried to attack me and the people who were also scammed in the deal.  If you are one of their "friends" they will do anything they can to support and defend the fraud.  It's not about what is occurring as much as it is WHO is doing it.

[Knight]

THANK YOU ECS!!  It seems the self-proclaimed Mopar Gods have fallen from their pedestals.  Honestly, that was all I really came here for.  I just wanted to post the truth about the car and maybe just someone might have come forward and said "Sorry man, we made a mistake."

I love MOPAR cars, but the people have turned into such Aholes that I really don't miss it.  My buddy has a NICE AAR that he has owned since the 70s.  He got tired of people giving him crap at the shows for the mods he made to it over the years.  He still drives it regularly, but rarely takes it to a show.  MOPAR has become strictly business and is no longer the enjoyable hobby it once was.  GM people are so much more fun and helpful.  Ford people are cool too, but I just can't go with Ford.

[Mytur Binsdirti]

The only things this thread is missing is literally 1) a girl in a bikini and 2) any basis for a lawsuit.

One down.....

[Ghoste]

Why am I not surprised by the alliance.  I hope  ECS that one of the helpful "occasions" you speak of isn't the Six Pack Charger with air, I'm probably wrong because I'm so stupid but if that is one of them I think everyone appreciated your input.  Now if you are talking about the one where a zone rep claimed that all TA cars were driven 1500 miles before delivery and no one believed it, I still don't believe and I can't disprove it anymore than he can prove it.  If you are talking about the one where the mail clerk saw a four door Barracuda, I don't believe that one either and nope, can't prove it anymore than he can prove it.
As for Knight, JC you are the stupid one.  You opened with wanting to provide a trainwreck to this long forgotten thread and you did succeed with that but beyond some name calling and finding a newfound ally with the other most angry contentious person here (and I know the wrath I incur for that statement Dave and I have tried hard to avoid your angry threads but this moron you are taking up the flag for is a straw I guess) you have done nothing.  You threw a bunch of rocks and want us to prove your bad, your record speaks for itself and is real easy to find.  
Can either of you provide evidence the car wasn't parted out?  JC you have been invited to do so.  Whatever authority came by to look at the car needed your help to know what they were looking at so the fact they couldn't find it doesn't show much does it?  Since you are so smart and I am so stupid, instead ranting about the people involved and bragging about your aggravated battery charges go through it step by step and fact by fact.  Speak to the other things that came up in the thread four years ago, not to what you want us to believe today.

[TUFCAT]

ECS, you are one of few people on here who has posted something that makes sense or is helpful.  The part that nobody seems to get on here is that there NEVER was anything to show that the VIN had been swapped on this car.  The Holy Grail of proof is an ebay ad from 2007 where a mostly complete Charger was listed as a parts car in the parts car section.  The information that the VIN and fender tag were sold on ebay was FALSE, or at least has NEVER been presented.

When I listed this vehicle on ebay in 2010, I was told the VIN had been swapped.  I was gullible enough to believe it at first and immediately tried to get the facts.  NO ONE from here was able to provide me with any information.  It wasn't until law enforcement and the NICB arrived with the copy of the ebay ad from 2007 that I realized this was a witch hunt brought on by a bunch of half wits.

The fact that the body numbers came back as a 69 Coronet was interesting to say the least.  That is what lead to a third investigation from the DMV.  I parked my 69 Coronet next to the Charger and let him examine both cars (as I did for law enforcement and NICB).  That is why I was able to PROPERLY (threw that in there just for you  familymopar) go to court and get the title to the car.  The next owner was made FULLY aware of everything that transpired.

familymopar, I guess that shows that you and your 6yr old are on the same educational level.  You don't have to be a genius to know that maliciously posting false information about an individual identified by their name and telephone # on a public website makes you liable.

Which brings me to my poor, dumb, Ghoste.  I challenged you to come up with the actual facts on the VIN swapping and told you exactly where to find all of the information, but I suppose that was too difficult for you.  So, instead you find another story from a secondary source full of misinformation and run with it.  Hey, it was online so it must be true, right?   You haven't learned anything this whole time because YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID!  

The article you found was based on the police report written by his friends in the police dept.  Once again, I will give you an unbiased source to get the facts from.  Call the Ocala State Attorney's Office (352-671-5800) and find out how (according to you) a man can get away with blindsiding a senior citizen and nearly beating him to death while 3 firemen stand there watching and the whole thing is recorded on video.  Once again I am challenging you to put up or shut up.  Come back with the facts or don't come back at all.

Hmmm, where did I hear this before?

You'll find that most who are bashing you do not care one bit about the situation.  They simply want to advertise their infinite wisdom & knowledge about a topic they really know nothing about.  It doesn't affect them one iota.  If you correct them with information that only you know about, they will contrarily respond with adverse comments.  Had you posted the opposite of the scenario you originally offered here, they would be countering with the very argument that you are making now.  You say black, they say white and vice versa.  

I wouldn't worry about it or give it a second thought.  It sounds like the situation has reached an acceptable, legal conclusion and you did what you wanted with your vehicle.  It's funny how that is the advice everyone expresses until it infringes on their personal opinion.  Hypocrisy seems to be one of the finer attributes for those who live a life above and beyond reproach.

You might want to re-read the "Ford making a 777HP Stang" thread.... Dave.

69CoronetRT, the trunk and core support numbers matched.  Those pieces were not swapped onto the Charger from a Coronet (not swapped at all in fact).  For the inspection of all 3 agencies, I parked my 69 Coronet next to the 69 Charger.  The guy from NICB went hog wild with the paint stripper trying to find some sign of panel replacement.  There was either a mistake in the records keeping, a mistake in the stamping from the plant or something along those lines.  

I was as cooperative as I could be during the investigations as I was interested in finding out the truth (unlike some people on here).  Truth be told, I had my hopes up of finding out the body numbers came back to a factory RT.  The car had RT badging, bucket seats, the 1yr only? 4 piston caliper disc brakes, and some other things that I can't remember now that made me think it was more than a 318 car.  All of those parts could have obviously been swapped, but it was peculiar to say the least.

Like I said before, if these cars should be scrapped because of a mistake, then that 1 of 1 brown Superbird and the factory 4dr Hemi Coronet in the Garlits museum as well as any other freak car should be scrapped.  That just seems like a very counter productive attitude from people claiming their intent is to preserve the hobby.

Hey, what do I know?  I'm just an uneducated inmate who swaps VINs and attacks senior citizens from behind according to the Gods on here for which I am unworthy to serve.

familymopar- I have watched the 2 lawyers filing motions back and forth in my current civil case.  One thinks the case has no basis and says it should be dropped and cites case law to back it up.  The other feels the case is strong enough to take on a contingency fee basis and backs the strength of the case up with more case law.  Either way I think I would trust a lawyer before I would trust your 6yr old on Google.  Especially when you say no false statements were made.  The original statement that the VIN and fender tag were sold on ebay was FALSE!  If you missed that in the 10 times I have mentioned it, then you need to accompany your 6yr old to school, or at least get Hooked on Phonics.

So how many more people does he need to insult to get his "fact's straight"...?  well, let's just add Familymopar to the list.

THANK YOU ECS!!  It seems the self-proclaimed Mopar Gods have fallen from their pedestals.  Honestly, that was all I really came here for.  I just wanted to post the truth about the car and maybe just someone might have come forward and said "Sorry man, we made a mistake."

I love MOPAR cars, but the people have turned into such Aholes that I really don't miss it.  My buddy has a NICE AAR that he has owned since the 70s.  He got tired of people giving him crap at the shows for the mods he made to it over the years.  He still drives it regularly, but rarely takes it to a show.  MOPAR has become strictly business and is no longer the enjoyable hobby it once was.  GM people are so much more fun and helpful.  Ford people are cool too, but I just can't go with Ford.

So why are you still here?  

[Ghoste]

You know what?  I applaud the self appointed Mopar police!  The more the merrier.  Without the self appointed "police" asking questions the self appointed experts would be free to run rampant.
What makes the experts opinion any more valid than the police questions?  Without both we can never establish the factual history of these cars.

[ACUDANUT]

I just think everyone needs to get laid, by a super hot model. 

[Ghoste]

   Yes, you are right, that would truly be the best end to this thread.