Based on the prior agreement (documented by a canceled check)? Based on the statute of limitations? Based on something else? What would he win? Clear title in the US over 0384? Sorry about contributing to the noise in this discussion; it's complex enough to make my head hurt but sexy enough that I can't look away... PS: Who the heck spends $600,000 and only documents the transaction with a check? I try to get bills of sale (with descriptions and VINs) even for $300 scooters. For lots more, I'd probably go crazy and get it notarized...
So many neat Ferraris seem to be involved in (or plagued by?) so many intriguing stories and with big money at stake there is no shortage of people wishing to express their interest. Differences in the law from one country to another provide an interesting twist on the age old tale of who has the "real" car number whatever. Another interesting aside is how in the USA many old cars never receive a paper title that can be transferred from one owner to the next, nevermind how documentation of legal ownership transfer occurs in foreign countries. The "title" might merely be a theoretical construct.
The 375AM parts that Kleeve has have no burn marks on them whatsoever. Those parts bear the original paint from 1957. The hood, the rear deck, the undertray still hand painted with the PF number show NO FIRE damage. That paintwork inside and out has no damage from any type of heat. Looking at this photo it is clear that much of the paint was removed after the theft. Take a close look. Then stop with this ''burned-out'' hulk crap. There is a reason someone downplays the condition of a 375AM when you buy it for $100,000 , knowingly that the Ferrari community knowedge of it being CLEARLY STOLEN. Then when you change the indentity with a fake number that never existed in ANY Ferrari record, smoke appears, Statue of Limitations expire, the owner dies, and then you mop up the mess. I am glad Mr. Swater made the statements he did on NPR. I hope he does the right thing to resolve his problems with the darkness he appears to be in. He would have been better off picking up the phone and calling Kleeve instead of dealing with all his lawyers , business partners, wanna-bees, and wise guys. Image Unavailable, Please Login
Regardless of how this all plays out and who gets what, I'm glad that a rusted out "hulk" of an important car has been brought back. It should never have been allowed to get into such a state in the first place. CW
Check out the picture of the car in post #21 - it was the REAR of the car that apparently burned - not the front. Look particularly at the melted paint on the cowl and the rust on the rear bulkhead from the fire having burned off the paint, leaving the metal completely exposed to the elements. http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=114840&page=2
I hear it was not out today and is likely out on Tue. Keep in mind this is a decision as to some early aspects of the Ohio litigation. Court dockets and Judges get real busy and it can be hard to predict exact decision dates. Stay tuned.
Here are actual court docs. The doc with the $2,500,000 price is from Kleve's estate docs - page one of the 3p Settlement, filed with Ohio court on 7.9.10. The doc with the $625,000 price is from Swaters - page one of the 3p Settlement, filed with the Ohio court on 7.19.10. Note that Kleve is named as the owner of 0384AM, that Swaters name is conspicuously absent, that Lancksweert does not disclose he is co-owner with Swaters, and of course that the price is different. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Here are actual court docs. The doc with the pay "Kleve" is from Kleve's estate docs - page two of the 3p Settlement, filed with Ohio court on 7.9.10. The doc with the pay Daniels is from Swaters - page two of the 3p Settlement, filed with the Ohio court on 7.19.10. Note there are no initials on the pages by signatories. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Here are actual court docs. The doc without signatures is from Kleve's estate docs - page three of the 3p Settlement, filed with Ohio court on 7.9.10. The doc with the signatures is from Swaters - page three of the 3p Settlement, filed with the Ohio court on 7.19.10. Note that the notary wordings were obviously changed, and then signed. More about the signings, and the New York versus Ohio issue, on a later post. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
I still say that if Swaters can produce canceled check(s) to Daniels in the amount of $625K, then the courts might give the Swaters document more weight because there is additional documentation (the checks) from long ago that back up that side of the story. We will see.
Here are actual court docs from Swaters Complaint exhibits, filed 2.12.10. This is how swaters' partner paid. Waiting for proof that checks, one or both, were negotiated. Two checks, not one check. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
So Joe, Please confirm: Kleve contract for $2.6M is unsigned. Swaters contract for $625K is signed plus Swaters producing 2 checks dated Sept 2, 1999 for the amount of the signed contract. (still waiting to see if they were cashed/negotiated). Thanks.
The contract stipulates that the funds were to be held in escrow, and were to be released only once the transfer documents were received by Lanksweert. If the contract was executed as written, Kleeve would only have received funds once the title had been transferred. Since the title was not transferred, Kleeve would not have received any funds. If the checks were for an escrow deposit, the cashed checks don't mean Kleeve received any money for the car.
The point made in Ohio court is that the signed version Swaters has uses page three of what Kleve signed, with pages one and two that Kleve never saw, and that are contrary to Kleve's already stated interests - price $2,500,000 and payable to Kleve vs price of $625,000 and payable to Daniels. Incidentally, Daniels fee is contingent on recovery (car or money) type fee. If Daniels knows that Lancksweert (Swaters' partner) will not hit the $2,500,000 price, then what result for Daniels? Kleve heir is not claiming there are two signed contracts. There was only one proposal, which was signed by Kleve. Once p1 and p2 are switched, all bets are off. It will not bind Kleve. When you have multiple page contracts, you run the risk of having pages swapped, and that is why you have the parties initial each page. You also all sign on the same day, or near the same day if in different locations. You also get Powers of Attorney that correspond in time to the agreement. Swaters radio interview says he used an attorney, likely in New York. His attorney's advice had to be overridden or ignored, repeatedly. But most telling is that the payment by Swaters partner was not made to the party as required, instead it was with two checks to different parties. Thus, at best, Swaters partner made only partial payment, assuming the check was honored and negotiated. See what paragraph five says about that.
Swaters was a law student. From the 1950 he engaged in the Car Business dealing, selling, and buying cars all over the world. The 375AM was a stolen car. It was known by him as stolen. He refused to return it to Kleve. Due course in signing a three page settlement contract is to initial each page of a contract when you are signing off on a multi-million dollar stolen car. Partial payment to an agent direct, contrary to the contract and failing to even call the principle in the contract is not normal. In this settlement there are layers and layers of buffer people, agents, partners that are indentified as agents, out of State New York attornies demanding New York law apply for a settlement placed in Ohio. Yet no one wants to place a foot in the Ohio justification to settle, collect the parts, transfer the title, or sign off with Kleve present . The original parts not stolen are left behind by Swaters in Ohio with the original vin plate after the reputed settlement. Kleve would never hear from any of the Swaters Settlement clan again - not a word. The facts unfold now.
Metalfinder, Without knowing the innerworkings of the case or what was presented in court, it is very hard to know how the judge will decide. Just curious as to your interest in this car. We already know Joe's interest and he has been forthright with his intentions. However, I'm wondering if you have any vested interest in this car. You seem very adamant that Swatters swindled Kleve as well as added knowledge about the case. Just wondering who all the players are in this future best-selling movie script. Thanks Charlie PS. Anyone: Do we know any more if the judge has made his ruling?Thx
I heard about the 375AM parts for the first time in January 2010. Prior to that I saw this 375AM in a shop in Italy in the 1990's where I was told it was a replica. Later I saw it at a Ferrari challenge event, racing under the number 0394. I visited the Ohio daughter in April. I spent a day with her and saw the original parts. I sorted through even more 375AM pieces in an old building. The parts I saw had no fire damage. I took pictures. When I heard the ''burned out wreck '' story , I said WTF . I was interested in what she had, and her story. I did homework. I drove to Maranello to ask about the build sheet on 0394AM and 0384AM. I had NO idea the car was there. As I knew there was a Court ordered Status Quo on the movement of the car - it was shocking to see Swaters had it in Maranello unknown to the Ohio Court or the Judge. Surprised , I took a few pictures, asked questions and left. Within minutes my phone was ringing with Swater's enforcement demands, in 20 hours Swaters attorney attacked me with a cease and desist order for telling the truth of the cars location to the heirs. Swaters court motion was to bar me from visiting Ferrari SPa to speak further of the car again to them. I took more interest after that happened. So, first hand I learned the court was not aware that the car was in Italy. So it all went pear shaped quickly and legal docs flying after that. I am a car collector interested in this 375AM. I was interested but have NO interest in the car other than that . The high end collectible car market is a small world , many of the big Ferrari guys with big multi MIL collections are now actively watching this thread - and I am interested it all. As I received a legal demand to shut my mouth, besides pissing me off , I figured I would read the suit and all the exhibits. What Ferrari SPa told me and what I know by reviewing the documents give me an opinion worth factoring that the car will be in Ohio again soon. I do not know that Swaters swindled Kleve. All I do know is in the evidence of what Swaters has said, and what he admitted doing with the switching of VIN's and the logic behind it all from A to Z.
Thank you for your added detail. I did not want to imply anything unseemly. But it seemed you had additional info about the case and we only just met you concerning these posts about this particular car. We are all interested in the outcome and I think most would agree that if an intentional wrong was committed, then it needs to be made right. (If this does get made into an international best seller, make sure your info gets added as part of the side plot.) I would be a little hot under the collar too if I were delivered court papers from asking questions about a car. Thanks for the info. Best regards, Charlie PS. Man this judge is killing us making us wait to hear what he decided.
Thanks for posting this. There seems to be no question that the original Chassis Plate is in Ohio. My understanding is that this would make it impossible under Ferrari's rules to Classiche it. Why was it at Classiche? Cheers
I sort of asked about this back in post #143 here> "Did Ferrari create a serial number plate for the car when it was restored? If not, is the car still 'eligible' for Ferrari sanctioned events?" Can't Ferrari as a manufacturer create a new chassis plate? What Mr Swaters did by putting the Ferrari in Maranello was a very astute move. Some money may change hands but IMHO that Ferrari will never ever reappear as restored in Ohio. CH
But I thought someone stated that Swaters had it legally in Belgium, just not in the US. And the US lawsuit was to gain US title so he would have it everywhere. (maybe he wants to bring it to Pebble Beach in the future). Can US courts successfully force it to come to US if he puts the car in Belgium (or somewhere else that has the same type of laws)? Not a lawyer and just wondering how much weight a US court has in Europe? Thanks
