Exercising some humor - Perhaps the link below is a fair summation of how the judge applied the moral high ground to this fascinating case [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prDCDmchtTg]Lucy Liu (O-Ren-Ishi) severs a head in Kill Bill vol 1 - YouTube[/ame] QUOTE=Terra;142516239]That would be m-o-r-a-l (i.e. not morale) high ground. Where/when/how did I either "make maligning statement about" you, and/or "take a slanderous shot at" you? For the record, I wasn't the first to post your real name (i.e. visit the weblink contained in Post #715, Page 36 from Sean Smith on July 17, 2013).[/QUOTE]
You were betting on the right horse and I hope those that dispensed flack are now suitably put in their place. Innuendo and misrepresentation of facts rarely win the race.
Chris, it's great that you've chosen to reveal your real name to everyone here, but you cannot have two separate user names on this site. For that reason, this second account has been permanently banned. If you prefer to use your real name from now on, please contact Rob at [email protected] and request that he change your other user name. Wayne
Another Gardner cheerleader with two posts. Funny and sad. Is that you Neil Wood? I have asked Ms. Kristi Lawson to post a short note about Gardner so that others can see the dynamic at work, between the lines. For months, Ford/Lawson sought Court safeguards to assure performance of the March 2013 settlement -- to elevate what was a mere contract promise into a court ordered and enforceable by contempt promise. So let's examine the checklist from yesterday's Order: Settlement w/Sept 14 auction now enforced by Court order -- check Settlement and documents are now NOT confidential and NOT sealed -- check Bonhams to hold funds in trust until internal Ohio dispute resolved -- check, though I sought an Ohio escrow Gardner intervention started July 7, case ended Aug 19 - set new record for shortest intervention -- check Affidavits, Lien, and Cases Against Gardner re Gardner Misrepresentations now part of official court record, for other victims (more to come forth) -- check Gardner Motion to Strike Affidavits, Lien, and Cases documenting Gardner Misrepresentation and victims OVERRULED, nothing will be striken -- check NO finding against Ford or Lawson - none, zero, zip, nada -- check NO Ford or Lawson filings "thrown out" by Court - none, zero, zip, nada -- check Send Gardner link to dictionary for "fiduciary" and "honor" and "thrown out" -- check Send American Arbitration Association party invite to Gardner, soon -- check I have said it before and will say it again. I have cut all ties with Gardner due to his repeated dishonest actions against others, and now against me, as are now well documented with affidavits and other case evidence. In my view Gardner is an actor who can charm his way into the trust of another, only to later betray or abuse that trust when money is on the table. P.S. - Timeframe to appeal Ohio decision - 30 days, but I think it will be done far sooner. Maybe we can tweak or clarify some of the Order's issues and avoid appeal. I'll leave that to the lawyers. If Bonhams can't make the Sept 14 auction, in my view its a whole new auction house ballgame, RM, Goodings, etc. That said, 0384AM is truly fantastic and I envision we will work through the issues and 0384AM will be united and sold, especially since all three of her sister cars 0392AM, 0396AM, and 0398AM are in the collections of billionaires. Maybe Marcel can give this thread an update as to who has each. Marcel, which car by VIN won the G.P.de Agadir in '54? Hint: Check windscreens and Pininfarina production photos to be sure. Answer: ??8??? Joe *
Very interesting, I for one cant wait for more information and personally found the response from CG curious. Will start warming the popcorn and chilling the beer while awaiting the next part of this drama. IMO, this would make a great movie/ book ala Billionaires Vinegar with all of the plot twists and turns, frauds and thefts, rich men and ego's involved.
Same here... +1. As a "juror" in this trial by Internet forum, I found the argument weak and the insinuation of a vast conspiracy insulting. This obviously started from a terrible wrong against the rightful owner (K.K.) but the evidence of a good faith effort to right it AND a settlement seemed very clear. That said... What really happened in the reported judgement?! All sour grapes, obfuscation and hurt feelings aside (and acknowledging that NO ONE is wearing a white hat in this foul mess), it seems the position of money paid for parts and clear title was upheld loudly in the "with prejudice" dunk.
Any relation ? 894 F.2d 708: United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Christopher C. Gardner, Defendant-appellant :: US Court of Appeals Cases :: Justia M
Today has to be remembered to all the Ferraristi in the world. Mark the calendars for the next 100 years as the FERRARI 0384 DAY: holiday, schools closed, Lambrusco wine and tortellini !!!!! 0384 will be back soon and it will be admired again. It is like a Michelangelo masterpiece!!!!
I have followed the 375+/0384 thread passively more or less from inception. Whether this is a cheap seat or not is a matter of perception but it certainly appears that a legal judgement and conclusion has finally been reached. This decision did not favor your position. Kurt Vonegut defined this aptly when he opined "Here we are trapped in the amber of the moment, there is no why!" For the record, your postings appear to flirt dangerously with ferrarichat rules in regard of character defamation and nature of some of the content. From a professional position I cannot imagine why you choose to expose your legal situation so openly other than to ensure the Ferrari Community remains enthralled with the ongoing saga of 0384. For certain 0384 is a survivor story par excellence and as usual, the car is the star. I have no idea who you are Ocean Joe but I wish you clarity and reason.
Could someone explain in SIMPLE terms what has happened,Who won, and what is happening to the car ???????
I suggest a very high level summary: Originally 2 people where involved, Kleeve the unconventional owner of a rare old race car, and Swaters, early Ferrari race driver turned importer and collector. The car was stolen from Kleve and ultimately acquired by Swaters. A lot of emotions were involved between those 2 characters, one because he was fighting to recover stolen goods and the other because of his attachment to a collectible item that he restored etc. This was going for so long that both original person died ( of old age). The torch was picked up by daughters on both sides, with a little bit of emotions but more money interest than the previous generations. And at some point other parties joined to help each of them via structured deals, partnership interests, and those - the one who made a lot of noise on this blog- had just financial interest into securing a deal , well the best deal for them. My understanding is that the daughters directly or indirectly but with appropriate POA reached an agreement which is the basis for dismissal but in doing so, it leaves the " other parties" unsatisfied by the outcome. A little bit like when you give a non exclusive mandate to a broker to sell your car and then sell it directly. So what we hear now are the unsatisfied additional parties that joined for money and have to face both the original principal parties , which have agreed the settlement, and the judiciary system that decided that because of this, so long the settlement is respected, there is no case. I guess at this point, except for lawyers, there is not so much interest into this case, from the point of view of car collectors.
And the final outcome regarding the car, while we don't have the full settlement agreement, is that the parts which are in one side ( of the Atlantic) and the car will be fully re united, and the car will be sold free and clear at auction and the proceeds will be split between the parties. This is the essence of a properly settled dispute, there is no winner/ loser in simple terms , this is not a football match, every party is reasonably happy or unhappy,,,except those that have been left out or thought they could have had a better deal.. And if you want the car, then you can bid for it!!!
As with many legal actions, the pending trial provides a compelling need to find an accommodating agreement and so often an agreement is made before the high stakes "all or nothing" results of the trial can be reached. Clearly in this case the Swatters camp did not want to go to trial, in particular in the USA where the car could very foreseeably be awarded to the Kleve camp in whole. Not only would they lose the car, but the investment in the engine, and the extensive restoration would also be lost. The law here is pretty clear and I didn't see much chance that they would prevail in keeping the car. The settlement I am sure will remain private, and I'm also sure that there are confidentially agreements that will preclude us from ever knowing what amounts were awarded to which party of the proceeds of the sale. The fact remains that the Swatters camp wouldn't have settled this if they knew they were going to win in court. There will never be an admission of what actually happened, but we can all read between the lines. Unfortunately, Jacques received stolen property, restored the car and didn't want to part with it. Those who state that his reputation remains unsullied are kidding themselves. Although he had ample opportunities to "man up" and do the right thing, he kept the car, presented it as a different serial number to hide the identity of the car and prevent the rightful owners from getting their property back. I don't know about you, but this most certainly diminishes his reputation in my opinion.
It's over. Typical mediation for a judge. Put all the assets together, sell em, divide the funds in an agreed upon %. Can't wait to see a YouTube vid of 0384 actually running.
The thing I cant understand is that you could make a good business case to paying out Kleve or the heirs properly well before now. The car is worth nearly double if it can be used/ sold/ imported into the USA without any competing rights to the car. Without that utility value the car would be worth what 4 - 5 mil at the most, with it $10 mil maybe. So what if you have to pay 2 - 3 mil to settle title and get the parts. The deal would still be profitable and justice would have been done without resorting to lawyers?
Kleve wanted $2 M way back when he was first negotiating with Swatters. Jacques may not have had that much in cash and/or didn't want to part with it, or sell off some other prized assets at the time, who knows, and it doesn't matter. What Kleve wanted was more than Jacques was willing to pay. As time went on, the value of the car just kept going up. As many folks who have a derelict but valuable car, they often see the value of a restored car and think that's what they should get for their bushel basket of parts. They don't take into consideration the cost of a proper restoration and deduct that from their selling price. Kelve didn't have the engine either, but all together he wanted a pretty hefty price at the time for the pieces that were stolen. I'd bet that Kleve would have kept jacking up the settlement price, and frankly, he felt since he was in the right, he should get something for having been ripped of and deceived, and I guess I don't blame him for that either. Not sure if that is true, but I'm putting myself in his shoes and that's what I'd want. I'm guessing that whatever the price was it was a good bit more than $2-3M and it took the passing of Jacques and his and Kleve's heirs to sort it all out.
What seems to have been forgotten is that Swaters initiated this process in order to get posession of the bits of the car he didn't already have. That would have been a pushover except the Kleve heirs got help in defending the case, and as a result managed to lift the lid on the whole sad saga. Once the information was out in the open, it became apparent that there were unanswered questions regarding the ownership of the car and how it came to be in Swaters posession. That gave rise to the possibilty that instead of achieving possesion of the other bits as planned, Swaters(heirs) might loose the car instead... I'm guessing that's what drove the settlement process M
