Story of 250 GT Cabriolet s/n 0799

Once again: According to the warrant the VIN was probably faked at registration in Connceticut and not in New Jersey. I agree that such a manipulation makes a search in a database more difficult.

 

Can someone answer these questions? [1] While owned by Meade,Tucker and Bowers was the car imported into the USA? [2]If so, when was it exported back,presumably, to Switzerland?[3] Should the Swiss person making the claim be required to produce paperwork showing how the car came to be owned by him/her and the details of the transfer of the car to Spain and Gianni Mennino[4]How did Bowers get a texas title on a car that may never have been in Texas and may never have left Europe. just one man's questions. tongascrew

 

Art S.,

According to my interpretation of paragraph 10 of the warrant the manipulated VIN "FER079958" was printed on the Connecticut registration certificate as there is no other certificate from another state mentioned there. The owner prior to Hallingby was Scott Rosen from Bedford NY and not from New Jersey. Thus, possible paperwork from NJ doesn't explain the manipulation of the VIN.

Regards,

Marco

 

The words "faked" and "manipulated" are a bit loaded. A more likely scenario is a simple administrative error or procedural interpretation, but I don't think the document settles any of that. Regardless, given how slight the change in the VIN was (presumably to fit a computer system) I'd hardly hang Mr. Hallingby. It just doesn't seem like the actions of a guy who owns five other Ferraris and significant collection of other vintage cars.

Too much information is missing to hang anyone yet.

 

http://www.sportscarmarket.com/articles/archives/1644

 

"Stolen $4 Ferrari - What The Insiders Say Really Happened"

Heck, I'd give $5 for it...

 

Looks like a civil matter, between the two "Italians".

The car stays with the "new owner".

 

I agree. So who has the car now? The police in CT?

 

I wonder if the Lawyer who placed the add stating the car was stolen knew about this?

 

If true, this would explain a lot, if not the time between "theft" and the recent claim of the vehicle. Perhaps the defrauded owner exhausted his civil options in Europe, finally seeking his compensation here in the States as a result? I'm sure yet more will be revealed in time.

 

Anyone have a photo of this car before the nose was reworked?

Thanks.

 

STANDARD PRACTICE IN THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, BY THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY !!!

 

Has there been any update on this case? I'd hate to think the car still in limbo sitting in a police impound facility!

 

A few months ago , when researching stolen Ferraris, I was following the fate of 0799GT, a Ferrari 250GT PF cabriolet (which the police mistakingly called a "California spyder"
confiscated from a Sharon, CN owner by the police after a report it was stolen.
Mike Sheehan has published a story of the car's history

http://www.sportscarmarket.com/articles/archives/1633

since it came to America and apparently it was sold several times (once by him) without anyone knowing that in Marbella, Spain it was reportedly stolen along with a couple other Ferraris, the owner being up in Switzerland at the time.

Apparently the ruse by which it changed hands without raising flags was that someone had altered the serial number so it was registered under a number that was not the same number it was built with. Also way back then maybe there was no national date base for stolen car VINs and maybe there isn't even one now.

My question is: if the car was shown at several concours, why didn't anyone in the U.S. notice it was carrying a wrong VIN number? Don't concours judges in the cases of rare cars look at the chassis number first? On the other hand I can't really say no one noticed because somone somewhere blew the whistle or the police never would have shown up at the last owner's garage with a tow truck.

So I would gather that if the original owner never accepted the insurance money offered , the Swiss owner could claim the car back...love to know the end of this story as I lost interest temporarily when no indictments seemed forthcoming.

 

In the days before computers, (boy am I old!) there was a lot of sloppiness with serial numbers. I remember buying a gullwing in Canada and mistakingly taking the wrong title. When the guy at customs asked why the number on the title and the number on the car didn't match, he was bullied into OK-ing the import because the numbers were only one digit off (the original owner had bought two gullwings made the same day).

Also I was stopped in a Maserati Ghibli a few years ago late at night in central California and raked over the coals by an attractive woman cop (who I think wanted to show she was as tough as any male cop) for a suspiciously short serial number--which didn't look genuine to her compared to the many digit American way of numbering cars. She just didn't believe they made cars in such small numbers! She finally let me go, but it was touch and go for awhile as I had no plates, no registration, no bill of sale, but did have a nice smile.

Adding to the confusion of 0799GT is that someone must have misidentified it to the Conneticut police as a California Spyder so the first news stories about the confiscation said "$5 million car." Yeah, I know, all those red cars look alike (though it is silver...)

When I looked at the chain of people whose hands the cars passed through, I thought I recognized
some people who might be considered infamous in classic car circles. One made fake Ferraris (replicas) back in the Sixties. Another, if he's the same chap, built a fake car for Pebble Beach (not a Ferrari) that won a class win and Pebble actually had to retract the win when the car was unmasked. Kind of reminds me of that movie called The Usual Suspects. Of course, just because the car was owned by some shady folks doesn't mean the car is a fake but as soon as I looked at the list of people that bought/sold it, a few red flares went up and lit up the night sky like it was day

 

Just got word from the owner in CT, the car has been returned rightfully to him.

Of course, it should never have been taken in the first place.

Regards,

Bill Noon

 

Good to hear!

 

Sports Car Market magazine is reporting that the owner is suing Gerald Roush and his Ferrari Market Letter, and John Barnes and his Cavallino magazine, for libel and slander. Damages of $5 million are being sought. Ca-ching!

 

great thread.

 

I couldn't find the story on SCM's web site. What is the basis of the suits against Barnes and Roush?

 

I havent read of the suit(s) yet, but to imply the last owner of record knew the car was stolen
would seemingly qualify as libelous.
On the other hand, I would expect two publications that pride themselves on their research and facts on one single marque to come out and say at some point that the car they hve mentioned on occasion was , at some earlier point in time, stolen if a police report was indeed made way back when (supposedly Interpol listed it as stolen).

It would seem such publications intending to be the most cited source of facts in one particular marque would almost have to report after the fact that a car they featured had its ownership in question.

In a similar case of an old car event seeking to take a step to recover its reputation, when a Pebble Beach class winner (an Aston Martin) was subsequently unmasked as a fake car, I heard that PB officials rescinded the award, no doubt to maintain their reputation as an event with high standards. But I don't think the magazine or newsletter should be punished if they merely report that such-and-such an incident happened (the confiscation of the car; the subsequent investigation by CN police and the return of the car to the last buyer). Those were facts that could be downloaded from the police blotter.

I don't have either publication's story in front of me but if they speculated on what was in the last buyer's mind that would be where they crossed the line, unless they are privy to private corresondence from the owner's computer that would reveal the buyer questioning the car's checkered existance.

hey, but what do I know, I just shovel horse poop in Chino...

 

I think these days when somebody gets burned (no matter the reason or who's at fault...even himself) everybody in sight gets sued.

 

There was a button in the SCM e-story to click for further info on the litigation that took me to this web address. It should work if you cut and paste it into a browser.

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-nysdce/case_no-1:2009cv02223/case_id-341944/

 

Thanks, Don. I still couldn't find the SCM story. It that for web subscribers only?

 

Documents filed in the case can be accessed through PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records - http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/). The case is 1:09-cv-02223-MGC in the Southern District of NY, Hallingby v. Roush Publications et al.

The complaint was filed on March 10, 2009 and a motion to dismiss was filed on August 24, 2009.

The gravamen of the complaint seems to be that FML and Cavallino published a 'stolen Ferrari' notice, knowingly damaging the plaintiff. But I'm no attorney, and your interpretation might differ.