375+ # 0384

In the interests of full disclosure, please share with us a copy of the 2011.01.31 Ford-Gardner Financing Agreement so we may all perhaps develop/gain a far better sense of the exact, specific nature of your relationship/financial partnership/arrangement/mutual understanding with Gardner, insofar as 0384 AM is concerned, etc.

 

2 very quick points,

1 - I am no lawyer but I dont understand how you can "un-steal" something and IMo compensation does not negate the loss, justice must still include some form of penalty for the criminal act?

2 - The only documents I have seen have shown that Joe Ford purchased 75% of the vehicle and tried to buy the other 25% which the court refused. Chris G certainly funded the court action but Joe Ford paid 300k for his share and I dont see how under any premise it can be constructed as Chris Gardner buying the vehicle.

Please do tell........

Ford – $3,000 invested total

Of course I wound you up ! Poor Tex, looking like a Younger Tom Price , but with a wedgie collection of parts cars . Brilliant.

BIG TEX :
Thanks for the moderator , it’s good to remove things that aren’t accurate here especially concerning anonymous people like Big Tex. Who is Big Tex anyway, some hillbilly dating his cousin in the deep south ? Guess he’s not a Max Vito with a Lusso driving around Monaco ! PM his phone number, I’ll apologize today. I want to ask him if AutoThief is one word or two in Houston .

TIMMMMMMMMMMMMMMY :

So, I have a 16 GB drive of likely the entire Ford Ferrari Fraud Saga, and a link to Ford’s video courtroom questioning. Without doubt he is the central character in this entire fiasco – a true life Walter Mitty as he’s called by his closet clients. The Gardner info I have, is already up on this thread, and out in the courtroom transcripts. I’m not making this up , I couldn’t make this story up, I am not that good !

1. Timmmmy – you are super Dull and single faceted , but you ask nicely and I will answer ! . You have to realize, this Blog is just for FUN. The facts are in the COURT. Criminal Act = taking the car Penalty for Injustice = 2 thieves were convicted and sentenced Stolen car= a total settlement and payment to the aggrieved – DONE. Compensation in a COURT of law and in REAL business DOES indeed negat the loss , especially the loss of Karl Kleve .

2. Ford , according to his Court Testimony, before Judge Martin in November 2013 , said he had $17,000 invested as of November 2013. The following day he was caught on the stand with the evidence that those funds came from his son ( who had a bank account, Ocean had no bank account for years he said in Court ) . So he again said about $20,000 invested, including the $17,000 from his son. Evidence in the courtroom a minute later was called up that the $17,000 was returned by Herb Haas to Ford immediately, as this ploy was part of the ‘’Default Trick’’ on Gardner . So Ford retracted the $17,000 , leaving his investment at $3,000 – going to unaccountable personal expenses. That was as of the end of 2013 – $3,000.

Need the transcripts in entirety ? Ask Joe Ford to post the PDF complete , it’s an entire different story there.

I’d asked this question : If Ford is the Principle, and Gardner is the server, why is it that Ford did not appear at the settlement with Bonham/Swaters? Why has Ford never seen or touched the 0384 AM car? Ford forged an application for title to place it in his name, concealed this from the court and the DMV froze the title to conduct a further investigation , yes or no? Why hadn’t Ford attended the auction, or even his counsel, to play the owner role he plays on F-Chat? I know this answer and none of you do !

180 Degree: Your post are good, and you have spent the time, but big pieces are missing. Your post of 1607 misses London High Court law. If Bonhams used self-help in performing on the HOA, along with all other parties except Ford , then Ford used self-help in delaying and trying to derail the sales (both) . The end result of the contract in the sale of the car, and September 2013 or June 2014 is not material. The other parties to the sale wanted the car sold , all but Ford agreed that we proceed and the Judge wanted it sold. The place to take action to contest the HOA was a London High Court – not by screaming fire once you got caught starting the fire. In America, and in London , the first thing that happens is the party screaming fire post a bond so the other signatures of the HOA are not damaged by a Lone-Crooks actions. The end result counts. Once caught for his frauds, Ford had no choice but to wreck the train with legal antics. Now, he can try in a London High Court where he and Lawson are being sued. He ‘d better get a wig that fits.

On the issue of the POA’s , they were totally not needed as Bonhams decided that the Ford Fraudulent Title was not assignable and by law had to be returned to the State for destruction. With this, the sale was legal and conveyance was under EEC and London Law. When everyone in the HOA is performing and one party to the agreement gets caught out for fraud, the contract doesn’t stop. It marches on to performance. If the fraudster here had any issue at all, the London High Court was the place to show up. But , Ford would have to show up on EEC soil for that , post a bond and have a reason.

The answer here is Ford has zero interest in the Ferrari according to law. He is just a server to his Master – Gardner . He went rogue. He got caught. That is WHY he’s under a criminal investigation by the State of Florida, and those charges got expanded this week.

If you need to ask Gardner questions, you all know his email address. Ask him

 

all but Ford agreed that WE proceed...who are the WE in this case?

 

"WE" are caught out

"Bonhams decided that the Ford Fraudulent Title was not assignable and by law had to be returned to the State for destruction"

Max, are you making this stuff up ? because if Bonhams really did do this, they are out on a very long limb all by themselves. There is a valid US title, and Bonhams "deciding" in the UK that that it's not assignable in the US is laughable. And most importantly the US buyer seems to think the US title is a problem for him.... and is acting accordingly.

Maybe Bonhams relied on representations from a third party to come to that conclusion? It will all come out in the end.

 

Max, you've gone pear shaped again!

 

There is a copy attached as an exhibit to the restraining order posted on the Swaters website together with an addendum signed 4.5.2011 confirming performance by Gardner on that date.

http://jacquesswaters.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Swaters-v.-Lawson-Agreed-Restraining-Order-signed-by-all-parties-and-judge.pdf

The agreement is signed by Ford and Gardner and gives Gardner 50% of Fords interest. It begs the obvious question as to why Gardner now claims 100% after he has already accepted half that amount

 

You raise a good point, Kim.
I'm sure CG's nom de plume (of the moment), Max will be along shortly to correct us dull boys, dinky collectors that we are, and clearly illustrate through yet more Alice in Wonderland logic why this is. All supported by indisputable facts with references cited, of course.

Cheers.

 

Bira: ‘’We’’ is a Cut and Paste of Gardner’s statements as evidence in the docs I have.

WRX: No Ohio title issued based on a false statement is valid according to Ohio law. No Ohio title is assignable once the car leaves the territory of US soil by export, according to Ohio law. The fraudulent Ohio title obtained by the false statements signed by Lawson and Lover Ford void the title on it’s face, according to Ohio Law. Bonhams had every right to decide what was legal and valid in their conveyance , based on the Court evidence , their diligence and that fact is the car is no longer in the US goods. It’s clearly been EEC property for decades and will be taxed accordingly when it returns to the USA if there is a desire to title it. If it is titled in the USA, it will not be a continued title from the Kleve 1993 application. It will be a new and Square One application with the purchase price of $18,000,000, Custom duties of 2.7% and all applicable fees. I doubt that any auction company conveys US titles on EEC goods, if they do , it’s not legal.

Title questions on 0384AM : It’s better that you call the Ohio Department directly +1 513-721-3271 and speak to them. Here is their Friday quote to me ‘’ We have a freeze on the title, pending an investigation into false statement made on the applications. It is not assignable and should have been returned to us. Currently, it is not a valid legal document . We know Joe Ford is a fraud, and the reason he is getting away with this is because he is an attorney and knows how to play in the courts’’ Quote.

Readplays: When will you retire that dancing costume in New York and get a ‘ Straight Job’’ as your mother was promised ? Was the operation successful?

Pearshaped : is the right word in Britain, and seems to apply to the pauperized Joe Fraud.

 

Was there ever a legal title for 0384AM?

 

Quite a few similarities. We could add, he lists owning a 750 Monza and mentions CG buying a "Monza".

 

The jig is up. "We" know who you are. "We" know your tells.

Enough with your lies. Enough with your attacks and slander of everyone -- attacking others like a rat that has been cornered -- cornered by yet another lawsuit, this time in London, England with you as a Defendant -- by a Plaintiff who apparently uses a PR firm. Nice touch! Add that to the Geneva, Switzerland lawsuit for fraud, with criminal implications, where you are a Defendant. Add that to the new Ohio, USA lawsuit for fraud and civil conspiracy where you are a Defendant. That PR firm is gonna be busy -- England, Switzerland, USA.

Attached is an official Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles ("BMV") email as to the "hold" -- i.e. evidence.

I will soon share October 18-19, 2011 evidence with this board that Gardner acknowledged Ford and Lawson as the owners and Gardner as the financier pursuant to the Ford-Gardner Financing Agreement where you agreed to finance through trial, appeal, and physical recovery.

I will soon share April 16-18, 2013 evidence with this board that Gardner approved the current Ohio title that lists Ford and Lawson as owners and lists no lienholder -- you know, the same Ohio title that Gardner's attorney filed with the Court on May 8, 2012.

Maybe I will post your linked-in profiles where you claim to be "Sometimes Archeaologist turned Metallurgical engineer, spare time Viticulturist . . . go-getter for a variety of engineering projects for NASA to the U.S. Nuclear Submarine Program, engineering of Offshore Oil Production Hardware . . . ". You claim in your profile to have attended "Loyola University New Orleans 1974-1979" for "engineering, international business." That is my alma mater. I checked with them. They had ZERO record of your ever attending, much less graduating. That is what we call evidence.

There's that pesky word again -- evidence.

Joe

*
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Joe

Can you also answer the exact date you shipped the parts to the UK ?

 

On Sept. 10, 2013 when I returned from traveling, I turned over custody of parts to Bonhams' agent, pursuant to a contested Order that was timely appealed, and on May 28, 2014, that Order was declared null.

Gardner and Swaters, instead of litigating in London as the HOA required, chose to waste time litigating the HOA in Ohio. Bonhams also failed to litigate the HOA in London. They ALL did so at their peril -- and the HOA expired. They were warned the HOA clock was ticking.

Gardner and Swaters obtained an Order that would certainly be appealed, as it was. Then, Gardner, Swaters, and Bonhams took it upon themselves to ignore the fact of the pending appeal, and started promoting an auction.

It is all in the timeline.

Joe

*

 

PR Release - OHIO

Kristie Kleve’s lawyer is Tim Allen Smith - a member of the OJ dream team . Joined with Joseph L. Ford as co-council with Rinnier/ Ed Collins pillars in the arena of the Ohio State Attorney network.

Convicted in 1993 and represented at the time by Joe Ford’s lawyer Edward Collins (25833) as Counsel of Record , Tim Allen Smith was placed on monitored probation for one year and disciplined by a state legal licensing authority in 1993. Cincinnati Bar Association v. Timothy A. Smith Case 1992-2535 Disciplinary Case/On Report of Board. It was not until June 2013 that Mr. Smith applied to the Supreme Court for the termination of his probation – which was granted in July 2013.

In 2009 he was sanctioned twice by the Supreme Court of Ohio and further sanctioned for a failure violation of required education. Since the first conviction he operates as is a low level criminal attorney with no experience in civil litigation. As a lawyer with a complaint , known as not knowledgeable about post-conviction law or civil matters he hired Judge Mark Painter , a level headed former Judge with a good reputation as an advisor. Painter joined the Lawson/Ford dream team.

JudgePainter.org

Painter got involved in the Ohio case on request of Tim Smith. Painter recommended the association as Smith had no business in a complex international commercial case . Smith’s case involved a Big Reward that Joe Ford and Lawson would walk away with .

Judge Mark Painter on discovery of Ford’s stink, resigned from the case immediately.


That pesky word again : Evidence
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I follow the start, with passion this discussion.
3 questions:
Because the auction house Bhonams not participate in the discussion?
Why Ferrari Classic does not participate, because they have had the car for many years to a few meters?
The Ferrari 375 Plus # 0384 how many parts are original?

 

Tom Price

I stand corrected Big Tex, we all don’t want to confuse you with Tom Price. Heaven Forbid if law enforcement gets those picture mixed up – someone is going to jail !

Photo #1. Price with a Ferrari – not sure if this is the $63,000,000. German 250 that Debbie Clark was mentioning she knew nothing about?
( Deb chime in if your on work release this weekend).

Photo #2. Price driving his Replica Talbot Lago with his mother.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I'm at a loss as to why you post in this juvenile manner if you expect to be listened to.

 

Gentile Signore Ottelli

You do not really believe that a private website such as fchat is the right tool for a company such as Bonhams to discuss such matters and to entertain the world? As said earlier, they are not in the entertainment industry!!! Don't be naive.
And Ferrari Classiche is not involved at all.

Marcel Massini

 

I respect the opinions of all!
Ferrari chat respects the opinions of all, including his.
Expressing an opinion is not a crime.

3 questions remain unanswered

 

No, Tom Price owns 4757, the ex Kroymans car. The one you're talking about is 3809.

 

Mr Ottelli

This discussion is mainly about the ownership and rights of 0384 AM.
Rest assured that Bonhams is not going to write a single dot or comma here. The same goes for Classiche. They may monitor here but will certainly not contribute. Why should they? The car as such is real, the real chassis, engine plus spare engine. Major parts of the old original body came with the car, as did about a dozen old rims and many additional items. It is the real deal and there is no doubt about it. The problems are legal ones and it is all about $$$$$$$$$. Tons of it.

Marcel Massini

 

Bonhams is a business dedicated to auctioning property belonging to others. To the extent that management at Bonhams has even considered instructing its personnel to participate in this thread, management has decided that it would add nothing to its bottom line to do so.

Ferrari Classiche is a business dedicated to rebuilding examples of its products belonging to others. To the extent that management at Classiche has even considered instructing its personnel to participate in this thread, management has decided that it would add nothing to its bottom line to do so.

For those of us on the outside looking in, the best place to start is to review the attached photos, pre-restoration. It stands to reason that any parts not depicted in these photos were added during the restoration. Although the car had been running a Chevy V8 when Karl Kleve bought it, I believe the original engine has been reunited with the chassis.

Another answer to the question, what is this thing called Ferrari 375 Plus #0384AM?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp7130Bjec4
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

You shipped only three days before the revival auction in 2013 and still expected Bonhams to perform under the agreement

Why did it take 5 months from the agreement to ship if it wasn't simply to scupper the deal ?

 

Since, as you say, the selected forum for the HOA was in London, did you file any motions in the London High Court to litigate the HOA on any grounds?

By the time you turned over the parts on 10 September, 2013, had you served any notices with the London High Court for changing the terms of the HOA agreement, halting it when you failed to perform by not delivering the parts in a timely matter ?

The Ohio Court Order to enforce you to deliver the parts to Bonhams agent in Ohio, was not appealed by you before you acted to surrender the parts, is that correct?

So, had you decided not to follow the HOA in Ohio, you did nothing before the surrender of the parts to stop your compliance by a Court Order in any Court concerning the HOA, correct?

Once the parts were supposed to be delivered, and it was clear that you would not make the September deadline, how did you reverse your compliance with the HOA? With a Writ or Court order ?

Was your reversal of the HOA filed in the selected forum of the High Court of London?

Did you send the Ohio titles to Bonhams on the same date, 10 September 2013?

Why would Bonhams have to litigate with you in London unless you filed a Writ in London to cancel the HOA ?

Why did you choose not to use the selected Forum of London for a court authority to put the sale on “Hold” after you failed to deliver the parts in a timely manner?

What is next in this matter in Ohio involving the car?

 

Think and you will see you answered your own question.

It is as if you hire a contractor to build you a house. Say you hire him on March 26, 2013, and say the contract requires construction to be complete by a deadline, say September 14, 2013.

If the contractor prevents the delivery of any materials to the job site (like Swaters refusing to lift the Status Quo Order that prevents moving any parts or docs to London), and/or prevents your communication to another subcontractor (like Bonhams' Maclean blocking any exchange with Swaters, and Swaters being content to not communicate), and say, by late July, you realize the deadline is missed -- well it's over -- it is impossible to perform what was agreed.

Thus, all you can do is put the others on notice (p. 64, Post #1268), document the default, and see who is concerned enough to litigate the HOA - a party who intentionally blcoks or prevents performance is basically saying they don't want to perform the contract - that was fine with me because I am content to resume the Ohio litigation that was stayed. I will document the HOA default to prevent any blowback, just in case. It is childish to think that blame can be shifted, at the last minute, when the blameworthy began and maintained their breach for the prior months that mattered. I also documented the fact that Swaters and Bonhams knew at the time they sought the hearing to "enforce" in the wrong venue, that the deadline could not be met. Thus, their reluctance, even today, to litigate the HOA. Rather, they tried to bully Lawson and Ford with a void court order, then, in another act of bullying, obtained an order to enforce that void order (i.e. that order is void as well), and then, they lost on appeal.

Ask 180out about if both the orders are void.

Ask any good contract lawyer to see who is to blame as to a default. I hope this helps explain the back and forth, and the way a contract breach is analyzed.

Joe

*