Hey Ocean Joe, the OHIO title that you posted on F-chat in your name, was this the same one that Judge Martin declared was fraudulently altered by you? Was that the same title that Kristie Lawson signed with a false statement on the application? We talking about the Ohio title right ? Was it the same title that Judge Martin declared you obtain from the State making fraudulent statements to favor Kristie Lawson and yourself by omitting Gardner's lien ( according to Judge Martin the person you worked, provided legal services for and stole documents from) ? Was that the very lien that Judge Martin recognized in your testimony of November 2013 in favor of Gardner, but asked you if you omitted that lien ? Was that the same fraudulently altered title that you cancelled your Power of attorney on and advised Lawson to do the same with Bonhams ? Is this the same fraudulently altered title that Judge Martin said you pulled a fraud with in before Judge Nadels Ferrari case ? So, I am assuming that when Judge Martin said that your actions were a fraud on the public, he was talking about you, right? Was this the same attorney Joe Ford that Judge Martin said I havent dealt with very many people as evasive as Joe Ford ? Was that you Ocean Joe aka/ Joseph Ford III or the J. Ford or your another son Joseph Ford who is also subject to a fraud suit in Ohio ? One more question on those titles? Did you think you would try to sell the car waiving those defective titles around as you owned them trying to steal Bonhams registered client for a $2.5M under the table commission ? Did you think your name on a fraudulently altered title , deemed a fraud on the public by Judge Martin, would stand up as a document of conveyance for a $18,000,000 Ferrari ? I talking in the context of your Court testimony in court that you have less than $5,000 invested in the entire Ferrari deal? Imagine, an indigent as you are having any rights at all in an $18,000,000 Ferrari while practicing law without a license with less than $16,000 gross income for 10 years? Lets hear it Mr. I'm not the kinda guy you cheat, in a contract, or in a court. My only question is, how these Ohio Judges let frauds like you and Kristie Lawson ride the system? You skirting the law, jump borders, file no tax returns, hide behind your sons bank accounts and simply keep the plates spinning with nothing in the Ferrari deal other than your illegal attorney fees and $5,000 in paperclips? I know why you and Lawson have nothing to loose as fraudsters. No wonder youre under investigation for felonies in Florida . Ferrari community be warned, any of you could be next on the Joe Ford Fraud hit list !
For all the dinky car collectors who dont get it. The car is no longer stolen. It was stolen once because it was an opportunity for two American thieves and a fraudster name Guy Anderson to take something that Kleve owned but failed to protect under normal custodian care. Kleve deserved to loose it, he had the money to recover it but it suited him more to be the victim. Once it was recovered 0384AM went through the court system under Belgian law and it was cleared. , Swaters bought the car after the investigation was closed and the car was released as 0384 AM, all legal . Kleve got paid twice . Kristie Lawson got paid. Swaters restored the hulk, and she got paid. Kleve had all chances to take the $45,000 he received from the FBI and go settle with Michael Kroch. Kleve did not return the money or even make an effort. Kleve didnt use the money in the recovery , he buried it and continued sleeping with his dog in the Cadillac in the bushes. Finally , Swaters met Kleves new demands 10 years later and issued two checks, that was to settle all and every issue raised in the same fashion Ocean Joe re-hashes his Dung bed. The Swaters checks got cashed, Kleve signed the rear of them and money went in jars. The car was removed from the stolen list and the case was settled. The FBI and local authorities never saw any evidence to relist the car as stolen, simply because it was no longer stolen. When the parts became an issue, the suit was filed against Kristie Lawson. Ocean Ford yelled changing the numbers and stolen car, but no one listened because it was non-sense and coming from a guy with Fords reputation according to court documents - I am not surprised. No collector stole the car in the first place. It was an organized crime years before Swaters legally bought the car. Poor Jacques got caught up in it with cast of characters very similar to Joe Ford all bandits and flakes.
Max, Your point is that because Karl was compensated for its loss, he relinquished its ownership of the car? That was a question I asked a few year ago but it was never answered.
Considering Fords attorneys are hired on the come of any money - how good can they be ? None were present at the Goodwood sale, and in fact I heard from one of the solicitors at the sale that Joe Ford has never seen, touched or been within 1000 miles of the 0384AM Ferrari ever. Those cheap Ohio lawyers are as smart as their questioning but they are dealing with a super fraud who has sucked in many a savvy car collector with promises of a share of the rainbow and run off from every lawyer without paying them. God bless those lawyers in Ohio. Photos are of Fords dream team. I think in the end OJ does a runner in a white van !
November 2013. It was not from the Judge that overturned the Appellate Court. Its the Judges statement on Fords questioning in his fraud charge , taken on the bench where Ocean Joe has been accused of stealing documents, altering the title and falsifying a public document with the assistance of Kristie Lawson. Pay attention Jeffy, a brown Ferrari is no excuse for being a dull boy all the time.
Max certainly doesn't have many kind words, the original theft all but disappears in his twisted justifications, as to "why" he feels the end result of the Swaters team, justifies all the means. It's amazing, really. Some type of advanced psychosis...if the Swiss won't lock him up, I suggest a medical intervention of some sort. He's WAY past our TOS agreement too, (personal attacks) but it's such a fascinating train wreck of mental activity to watch, I guess we should let him burn. Shine on, you crazy diamond!!
He REALLY gets his rocks off when he talks about OJ's "felony investigations, and pending arrest".....yet, here's OJ, posting again. AND I might add, taking valuable time away, from the MGB restoration project.
If I own a car, I a entitled to put it in a field and burn it. And the fact that I am entitled to do somehow means that I deserve to lose my property? I completely disagree. If something is mine, then it is mine to do as I please. No one else has the moral authority to take my property.
He's using situational ethics, to justify taking advantage of an old man they THOUGHT might not notice it's absence. It was parked between two railroad engines and a shopping cart, after all... Amazing, really. Many old Ferraris fell into worse condition..the one burned in the barn of a California wildfire comes to mind. It's rolling again now. Sorry, Max....that's where you and I part ways, when you throw out statements like that.
Max Vito You make the exact same mistake that Gardner makes. Post the Court Order that declares the Ohio title as defective or fraudulent. End it here and now -- either there is an Order or there is not. (I know, and I think you know too, that there is no such Order.) Gardner's attorneys tried three times to reform the title and failed. The more the Judge learned about the prior case and the years of facts, the more he understood that my evasiveness was simply me being me - with my Architect and Law training that tends not to have a short answer. I was being honest, truthful, and precise as I tried to explain the complexities, the years of events, and the thousands of emails that Gardner's attorney had tried to cram into a theory that simply did not pass muster - once you understood the evidence. The first time Gardner's attorney tried to reform the title was at the Nov. 11, 2013 Preliminary Injunction Hearing. The Judge told them that issue was not on the docket nor briefed. So they set the issue for a Dec. 16, 2013 hearing. The second time was at the Dec. 16, 2013 hearing on Gardner's Motion to Reform the Title. The Judge refused to reform it, pointing out that Gardner's attorneys should have raised the issue in the prior case. Gardner's attorney then pleaded for more witnesses. The matter was continued to Jan. 17, 2014. An excerpt is below. The third time was at the Jan. 17, 2014 hearing. Again, the Judge refused to reform it. By this time, it had become apparent to all that two different Gardner attorneys knew of the Ohio title listing Ford and Lawson as owners with NO lienholder, and EACH were content with it. The Judge also addressed Gardner's claim that Ford was Gardner's attorney - by saying that Haas, NOT FORD, was Gardner's attorney. An excerpt is below. So, Max Vito, take a deep breath, get all the transcripts, and see the progression that occurs as the Judge learns more and more about this case. Go where the evidence takes you -- that is how to predict the ending. Also, post your identity as something is just not right, and others on the board sense it. Man up and own it. Joe * Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Putting on my best Danny Crane/ Ally McBeal/ Saul Goodman/ Lionel Hutz impersonation I ask the jury is it not correct that on page 52 of tthe Ferrarichat thread, post 1040 to be exact there is an attachment that quotes from the apellants (Chris Gardner) own affadavit and pursuant to that did you not state on October 11, 2011 and I quote "I did request and we agreed, that my contigent lienright may one day be recorded officially as security interest - thus again showing I did not expect nor receive any ownership interest. Ford advised me that plaintiff may fuss about recording such a lien, thus per change #1 we agreed on this "at some point in the future when Ford's counsel advises that doing so will not upset the proceedings."" Does the apellant agree that this was part of their own affadavit? Does the apellant agree that any lien would also have constituted a breach of the status quo order and finally does the apellant agree that digging your own hole is freakin hilarious...... I put it to you the jury that all Monsieur Gardner ever received was the promise that at some future point, when it suited all parties, he would receive a "security interest" over the vehicle. Had that day come when it suited all parties he would indeed have had a lien but I think the jury will agree that the day had indeed not come. Your witness, I will go and badger someone else....
Max, Prugna takes offense to your color blindness. I take offense to your lack of recognition of the color diversity of Ferraris over the long haul. As far as I am concerned it illustrates your lack of historical perspective. Since you have again brought up your insult I will now respond to your insult of Prugna being a "wedgie". I seriously doubt your credential to hold a serious discussion on automotive design aesthetic and evolutionary significance. So hold your insults to yourself. Jeff. Unlike you I don not hide my identity.
Is it just me or does it seem like we are only getting one-and-a-half sides of this story that clearly has at least three sides? >8^) ER
In the law of security interests, a future security interest in not perfected (meaning not valid). It may become perfected at some point, but an intervening event (such as the sale of the collateral) may prevent it entirely.
100% agree. Morally it was Kleves car to do with as he wished and in Ohio he still owns the car (albeit now registered in the names of Lawson and Ford). Unfortunately, morality was not recognised by the Kings Adjudicator in Belgium when he lifted the seizure, on a previously stolen car, permitting free use to a motor dealer. As often happens, legality has absolutely nothing to do with with morals. Swaters and his partner legally owned and restored a car with title still registered in Ohio. Kleve also legally appointed an agent who negotiated a payment of $625,000 from Swaters & Co for the Ohio title and parts. Morally, the big question I ask myself is, what is the right moral solution ? On the Belgium side, I do believe that Florence Swaters giving back 50% of the proceeds is a moral solution. On the Ohio side, morally I think the bulk of these proceeds should go to Kleves estate not the posters on FC. The big missing piece remains Kleves agent, Daniels, as morally he should be involved. He alone can account for the previous settlement but curiously he has never been included and the question why ignored.
Let's get this straight!!! To all the members here on FC. I'm not hiding my identity, my name is Max Vito and please note I'm NOT Chris Gardner. That makes me laugh!!! Check my profile and you will see I'm a private collector. Now retired and having fun with this thread. NEXT: Jeffy . You made no comment of material interest referencing my post. Basically, if I was the Ohio buyer of a $18,000,000 Ferrari and Ford showed up with his name on the title fraudulently waiving it around on Ferrari Chat , Id make sausage out of him. If I was one of those pillar of the car communities of Ohio, I d l send my lawyers in like mad dogs to dispose any fuzziest the Judge has on protecting the rights of the people that paid to place him in office in the first place. Why that Judge didnt put Ford in jail directly from the bench miffs me. Here you have this indigent waiving the fraud title around like he owns it and extorting money from a situation that got past the Judges. I understand why Bonhams wanted any disputes in a London Court. How can any Judge deal with shackled prisoners dressed in orange in the morning, clear his head, 2 martini lunch and deal with a commercial fraud claim brought by European business people in the afternoon. Will teach all of us what jurisdiction we want to litigate in, unless you are indigent or sleeping in a car with a dog. I didnt mean to insult you by references to your Prune Wedgie. Youre the owner, not me. I am not hiding my identity at all Jeffy. Like many of the dinky car collectors on this F-Chat , I opt not to post photos of personal info in fear that a guy like Joe Ford will show up and weasel into my garage offering free attorney work and wind up with his name on my Lusso title . Since when does stating your real name add to credential , are you dreaming ? It seems the Ford cheering section is always asking this question ! My insults to you are actually delivery technics , they are reflections of aesthetics and evolutionary significance of wedge shaped design progressions on Prugna hues, in laymans terms ie: a brown wedgie vs a Prune evolutionary milestone design.
Here they are.... Collins / Rinear / Smith Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
it is amazing how Max Vito continuously manages to keep his backside on public display... it's like we already know him from that view
I don't see the Lusso in his profile...*squinting* Max, Taking this slowly....so......you....understand......... The litigation venue, over the car, is the one in which the car resided, quietly sinking into the ground, saplings growing thru the gaping engine bay. I don't think it has been effected by the car's world travels, no matter where that may be. I think Daniels is locked up?? Who is the new owner???
There you go again, being the ultimate decider of what someone should do with THEIR property, and you pretend to have the MORAL authority to judge that right be taken away??? Once a stolen car, always a stolen car, unless returned to the original owner, or an insurance claim is paid. Not paid by someone else because they have a higher purpose for it. Also, if this transaction is as clean as the driven snow, why did the chassis number get changed to 0394AM. Me thinks to hide the fact it was STOLEN and salve some consiences. Perry
I hope that whomever is involved in this litigation will show this statement to the judge. If you are anywhere tangentially under his jurisdiction, you will get a contempt charge. Worse, you could be in a lot of trouble. It would be nice if you could convince us with facts and reason, instead of insulting everyone in sight. I'd really like to try to figure out this mess, but it is hard to separate fact from hyperbole, and you are just adding to the drama.
