375+ # 0384

The miraculous discovery of the long lost affidavit clearly shows that Kleve was applying for an ORIGINAL first title and not a DUPLICATE.

Does this have an implication on Wexners ability to register his title ?

 

Chris, I agree with you that there is no doubt that Karl Kleve owned the car. The rest of what you say is not correct.

The Judge in 1993 who ordered the issuance of the Ohio title, after HEARING from Karl Kleve (I do not have that hearing transcript) and after reviewing the Kleve Affidavit, concluded that Kleve was the owner and that an Ohio title to officially indicate Kleve as owner was appropriate. Thus, the Order went out on March 3, 1993 followed by the Ohio Title issuance on March 24, 1993.

I recall seeing 1989 Kleve affidavits and inquiries made to both the State of Illinois (for Kimberly's title) and to the State of Ohio (for Kleve' title) where Kleve sought to obtain duplicates of whatever title those states had on record, and the Ohio affidavit does refer to Kleve's house fire. The result was to learn that both states have a rolling purge of records older than 9 or 10 years. A purge does not mean you no longer own the property. It just means the state no longer wants to bother with tracking or keeping a record of it. I think that is an obsolete policy likely changing as we speak due to electronic record keeping.

The important thing to realize here is that a Title (the paper thing) is an INDICIA of legal ownership - it is a paper SYMBOL. Paper titles are a tracking system devised and operated by states to protect against theft of the underlying physical object (the car).

The paper title is REQUIRED redundant evidence that an owner consents to the conveyance -- when you buy a car, merely taking physical possession is not enough, you need the owner to sign off on the paper title to signify consent to convey ownership.

The legal prerequisite for any conveyance to legally transfer ownership (the legal concept of "title") is consent.

The outcome is the same for Wexner as it is for anyone who wants to become an owner of this 1954 Ferrari 375 Plus #0384AM. You need the owner's consent. If there is a paper title, then that is where the owner's consent to convey should be indicated. If an owner is selling through an auction with a title, then the auction house must have a Power of Attorney that allows the auction house to act as agent of the owner to convey ownership. Some states have specific types of Powers of Attorney that one must use if intending to convey that state's title without the owner actually signing the paper title.

Merely shipping property from the US to the UK does not suddenly or magically wash away all prior ownership. That claim is so ludicrous that it is an embarassment to anyone who makes it.

Here, Bonhams was put on notice that the Powers of Attorney from Ford and Lawson were withdrawn on Sept 24, 2013 and February 18, 2014. There thus could be NO legal conveyance. Bonhams (or Swaters or Gardner or Ford or Lawson) should have filed suit in the London High Court of Justice if any one of them was truly interested in enforcing the HOA's specified Sept 2013 auction (or any auction). The Bonhams decision to steamroll ahead despite repeated warnings and to then misrepresent to the buying public that Bonhams had authority, and that all relevant litigation was settled (when it was not) are IMHO, two independent acts of fraud plus a violation of UK law.

I think Copley/Wexner UK attorneys are very capable and qualified to drive that issue across the finish line in the UK court, to a decisive win.

Joe

*

 

The Ohio title issue.

Let’s start with the individuals that have stated a title is not needed for a vintage road and track Ferrari or just any classic race car in Ohio. Obviously that is wrong!

The State of Ohio began supplying titles for vehicles beginning on January 1, 1938.

If you own a car manufactured after that date and you choose NOT to title your car then, “That’s on you Sir.”

You can NOT list a car stolen in Ohio without a title, no matter how hard you try.

Now, let’s look at disassembled junk cars in Ohio.

In the Great State of Ohio, you are NOT allowed to title a car without a motor or if the vehicle has been junked or no longer resembles a running and driving vehicle. Like the Kleve junked-out remains of a Ferrari.

When your car is in the above condition, you are required to relinquish your Ohio title for cancellation and destruction. That is the law in Ohio.

This would have been the case if Karl Kleve had a title and “he did not”.

The title cancelation law began in 1971 confirming the Kleve ‘Court Ordered’ title is a, “FRAUDULENT TITLE DOCUMENT”. That title could not possibly be a legal issued document in the condition the Hulk was in.

Now let’s address the purging of the Titles as stated by our very own Ocean Joe.

That is also not true! As you will see, in the attachments, the State of Ohio did not initiate computerized titles until 1991. This is just another way for Ocean Joe to dupe the readers.

Perhaps Ocean Joe did not know that information since he is NOT an Ohio resident.

OJ claims to be an Ohio resident solely by being listed on a fraudulent title produced by converting an earlier ‘fraudulent Court Ordered Ohio title’.

Oh by the way Ocean Joe, will you please post the date you received your Ohio driving license to become an Ohio resident? As stated by the State of Ohio that process takes a year to be a resident.

I’m sure the readers would like to see how you acquired ownership via an Ohio title without being an Ohio resident. That too is unlawful.

Now it is becoming quite clear what is actually going on here.

One more thing I want to do is NIT-PICK if that’s OK with Ocean Joe.

The Ferrari 375 Plus did not have a speedometer and all who raced the car knew that fact since the drivers look down at the gauges during the race. A speedometer is not required by race professionals to know how fast they are running.

Ocean Joe, you do know that an odometer statement is a federal form that has resulted in many a car dealer going to jail for tampering with that document. Don’tYou?

Now let’s talk about the other NIT-PICK claim OJ stated; that European race cars do not have license plates. Wrong Again!

Ferraris as well as other makes of yesteryear were often driven to the track, raced, then driven back home. The vehicles did have license plates and were registered to go from country to country throughout Europe prior to the formation of the EU.

OJ, did you ever wonder why there is a cutout in the bodywork?
Answer: just for such a plate.

Have you seen the Plus wearing a plate on it while racing in period in Europe?
Take a close look…… its there.


Was Karl Kleve the architect that forged the bill of sale document to allow him to lie to create the Fraudulent Court Ordered title?

Well in honor of the Ferrari export to Europe (to be restored 2/22/1989) and in commemoration of that date, I will Post a picture of the Kleve collection that was on the corner of Race and Remlin roads taken on January 1989.

I am sure all of the readers of these many posts have a visual image from the descriptions and information that has been displayed on this #0384 Forum. This post may debunk the myth of Kleve’s intention to restore the vehicles you will see in the upcoming post.

I will post the never before displayed picture/pictures exclusively for the F-chat members on the shipping anniversary 2/22/1989 of #0384.

This picture was displayed in the Atlanta Federal courtroom to many gasps and 12 very upset jurors. I often wonder why Ocean Joe never posted these or any other pictures from the Atlanta proceedings.

Maybe the F-chat forum will figure that out.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Pretty easy for the F-chat forum to figure out - Kleve owned the car. Period. All the title nonsense you posted above seems to be just lawyer weasel-ese to justify what amounts to theft of the car.

What does OJ's current residency status have to do with whether Kleve owned the car and whether the car was stolen from Kleve? Nothing. Just more lawyer weasel-ese.

 

spot on...

 

Really, I am sure glad no one is listening to this type of theft recovery advice. It seems its coming from the cheering section of a lawyer with an inactive license.

So, let me tell you what would happen in the ‘’if’’ scenario at the coffee shop:

Les’s shows up for coffee with his car. Lawson in tears, points and says ‘’ That’s our car ’’ . She calls Ocean Joe, her partner. Ocean calls the police. The police arrive.

Les says ‘’ Officer, its my car. I bought it legally. I imported it, paid the tax and duty, here’s my insurance, here my new Ohio title’’. ‘’ These people are making false statements to law enforcement about there ownership of the car, Officer ’’. They tried it before, officer. The woman in tears received full settlement for her interest in the car, here’s a copy of the agreement she signed. Here’s the wire transfer to her, officer. Here’s the fraud suit against her and her business partner – the guy yelling on the phone. Here’s the false title that the both of them have been promoting as valid in order to induce money for all sorts of people, globally. He’re a copy of the FBI file that has been closed for years on the subject. Here’s a copy of a letter from the FBI to Ford ( believed to be purged and in a fire) stating that no law enforcement agency will take the complaint from either of them – simply because the car has been recovered and legally sold . Officer, the car is no longer listed as stolen for decades and is no longer a stolen car.’’

Joe Ford is a no show to the cars in coffee event, as he’s , to date , never seen the car . He’s on his cell phone directing the circus.

A big scene for nothing at Cars and Coffee.

The Ferrari 0384AM is no longer a stolen car. It was stolen just like John Shirleys 375MM. All claims were reduced to a settlement done where Karl Kleve and Kristine Lawson received full compensation for the loss – in services, cash, bank checks, wires and a promise by her partner Joe Ford to pay her an extra $900,000 . That compensation is documented but it was purged from this thread, and distorted with the use of fraudulent accounting . That compensation was paid in 1990 by the FBI to Kleve, and again in 1999 to 2001 to Karl Kleve through his agent Mark Daniels. And if that wasn’t enough , further in 2010 to 2013 to Kristie Lawson and her partner in crime – Joseph Ford.

That amounted to, about $1,500,000 in actual cash payments solely on the account of Kleve, Lawson and Joseph Ford. In 2013 , Kristie Lawson was to receive another $900,000 on top of the $1.500.000 the Kleve Klan was paid . She opted to conspire with her partner ( the non –practicing) , alter an already invalid Ohio title, and defraud the day-one purchaser who on Feb 25, 2010 was defrauded by his crooked lawyer from Boca Raton.

In the end here’s what happens :

1. Les keeps his $30,000,000 Ferrari purchased at a deep discount because of the crooked lawyer’s antics. 2. Ford is swept of any ownership interest in the Ferrari because of Fraud 3. The entire Ford Family of co-conspirators males get nothing from the sale, and the Ford Trio is all bankrupted with judgments. 3. Kristie Lawson is convicted of fraud in Ohio, and judgments are awarded against her in London for conspiracy, fraud and diminishing the value of the car, along with a judgments for costs. 4. Ford being penniless anyway , goes on to his next victim 5. Lawson having multiple apartments in Ohio is served with a judgment lien, and looses everything because her lawyer Smith mis-represented her interest and held her in a fraudulent partnership with a crook – knowingly.

Lawson sues her lawyer, Mr. Tim Smith for malpractice and recovers millions.

Swaters is found to have zero involvement in the ‘’ Ford Version’’ of 0384AM as it is proven that Ford was clearly a manipulator. It’s shown that the Ford version that has been purged, distorted , in a fire, lost and ‘’ shuffled ‘’ in a lawyer’s trick of shattering thousands of documents on the internet to play out the ‘’poor aggrieved woman’’, the all American victim hero inventor and the rich Europeans that have ‘’too much money’’ in the first place.

The entire case closes as Ford disappears into another make believe existence in some other chat room where he never puts his pants on again.

 

BUT WAIT LES HAS NO TITLE IN THE US.

Probably the patrol officer responding to the scene would be overwhelmed. Call a supervisor to the scene then the letter of the law will drop.

The vin will be inspected and the title. And then the kicker that officer will climb in the police cruiser type in the tiltle # find out who the state says owns it by title. Radio for a flat truck to take it and then state to Les, KKL, and Joe its a civil matter. Agree or go to court.

Police in the US cant decide these matters.


Point being Joe, KKL, and as a lien holder Gardner own that car legally right now in the US.

I agree with Kim though we need some popcorn.
Im buying coffee.

The rest of your statetment is fodder and personal attacks.

 

I agree about the civil matter not being resolved by officers. However, if a car is listed as stolen and someone is in possession of stolen property, they just don't walk away from the scene. With the value of the vehicle being what it is, the theft would definitely fall into the Felony spectrum... That isn't a Civil issue, but now a Criminal issue.

 

reproman's scenario cannot happen for obvious reasons... it is a piece of baseless fiction
on several points

 

Hey Cheesey why lets the facts stand in the way of good story AND it is the Oscars tomorrow so maybe he is practicing his script-writing.......

 

I put up three posts in early December 2014 on the Ohio statute regarding certificates of title, from a very non-expert perspective. What I had done was to look up the Ohio statutory scheme regarding certificates of title, and share my understanding of what I had found. I never got a satisfactory reply. I wonder if anyone might care to pick up the thread. Here are the posts. Sorry about the length:

 

Interesting question asked, and here is the answer, direct from the witness.

I signed the shipping document "Joseph Ford, under protest, to comply with Aug 19 Court Order." I appealed that Aug. 19. Court Order and on May 28, 2014 the Ohio First District Court of Appeals determined the order to be unlawful ab intio, i.e. at no time did the Ohio trial court have jurisdiction to issue that order.

So, there was no owner export within the meaning of that Ohio statute.

Joe

*

 

+1

+1


Some baaad people did some baaad things in their greedy effort to sell property without owner consent, in 1986, 1989, 1990, 1999, and now, once again, in 2014.

It seems like it is a tradition with this particular and extraordinay Ferrrai LOL.

Joe

*

 

is a non-issue. But thanks for the photo of 0392AM, reproduced below. Note the underbody panel under the gas tank and compare it to one of the Kleve Ohio Parts, photo below.

I believe Kleve did intend to one-day breathe life back into the cars.

And then while Karl Kleve was making his plans, life happened.

You know that. I know that. We all know that.

As to the Ferrari, Karl Kleve did save the Ohio Parts for a reason - that is irrefutable.

Let's just leave it at that.

It is time we all put the focus back on the car - the fabulous piece of automotive racing design and history that it is, made by one of the industry's greatest marques, during the golden age of racing.

Joe

*
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

You raise an interesting point of law. However, the contention that Ford was not an exporter brings into play other facts which may affect that contention. Just a few off the top of my head: In March 2013 Joe Ford and Kristi Lawson did agree in writing to export the Ohio parts and documents for sale abroad. This gave the other parties to the HoA the right to apply to the London court for an order that Ford and Lawson perform. The extra-jurisdictional August 2013 Ohio order -- regardless of its flaw -- did have the real-world effect of causing the other parties not to make the London application. Ford and Lawson subsequently engaged in conduct and communications which negated the statement on the shipping document/ The other parties to the HoA relied on these subsequent words and deeds. Third parties participated in the resulting auction, and one of these third parties bought the car.

I don't know the legal effects of these additional material facts, on the question of whether the Ohio parts had and have the status of an exported car within the meaning of the Ohio certificate of title statute. I'm just "issue spotting." Personally I don't think the fraudulent Ohio certificate of title is significant, by virtue of the provision in the HoA requiring the parties to transmit all certificates of title and similar indicia of ownership to Bonhams, and giving Bonhams authority to validate or negate each of these documents, in Bonhams' sole discretion. But if Ford and Lawson do think the continued validity of the fraudulent Ohio certificate of title is important to their claims, they will need a plan to deal with the Ohio certificate of title statute. If that plan consists of the argument that the Ohio parts were never exported, within the meaning of the Ohio statute, they certainly must also have spotted these same issues. If so, what are their conclusions? What cases has their research found?

 

I agree this story reads more like a law exam question than real life.

I do not think anyone can claim reliance on Ford or Lawson for their going ahead with an auction - the manifest weight of the evidence says otherwise, and it is laughable to watch them take lone snippets out of context from various letters to argue reliance. I think they will lose that argument and their credibility at the same time.

I do not agree that the HOA (fraudulently induced, expired) gave Bonhams authority to "negate" anything. The HOA para. 11 gave Bonhams the duty (fiduciary in my book) to choose from among all the documents Ohio had and that Belgium had, which document was valid and necessary to convey title, concurrent with and predicated upon HOA para. 4's all parties working together to resolve all ownership issues. You need to read the entire contract as a whole to see the interplay of its parts. Again, to argue those Bonhams v Ford, Lawson issues assumes Bonhams has 1) won by showing there was no fraudulent inducement claim, then 2) won by showing by the HOA's express terms it did not expire after missing Sept 2013, then 3) won by showing they can auction when we withdrew our consent.

It is highly likely Bonhams will not prevail on any, much less all three. Plus, there is yet NEW evidence of even more bs behind the scenes.

In terms of working closely together, as a group, we simply never got that far as apparently Bonhams had cut a side deal with Swaters to breach the HOA, in violation of any sense of duty or fair play, while Gardner had poisoned the well. Bonhams then proceeded in a very partisan fashion against any sense of contract and fair play.

I think the headline risk for Bonhams is huge.

Joe

*

 

Joe, it is very easy to get lost in the detailed argument and to forget the process. There are many issues that need to be resolved before you triumph.

1. You have to win your appeal on the case dismissal which is looking increasingly difficult given it is remaining in the appeal court

2. You have to win the London claim which includes a direction that the HOA remained in effect and Wexner will have to win against Bonhams and again if your appeal fails and given the issues on the Ohio BMV his arguments are looking increasingly difficult

3. You have to settle your arbitration with Gardner which could result in you either getting nothing or 100%

What is the predicted timeline sequence and how do you see it playing out to the end ?

 

Joe, can you post the export documents you signed under protest and was any duty paid

 

Wow! you can't really believe what you just posted!

Kleve junked a beautiful, complete and running "UBER RARE" Ferrari 375 Plus#0384 that had good paint on it and did not need restoring.

Now thats a fact that you should start with.

Kleve stated (ON MANY AN OCCASION) that he took the good parts off of the cars.

That would have been before junking and abandoning them.

Do you need me to re-post that for you?

Now for more Nit-Picking. Here is a picture of #0384 with the Italian Manufactuers Plate.

Provo means "test" and MO means "Modena" for your information.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Guy,
You seem to have a problem with the concept of property. It was Kleve's. It was Kleve's prerogative to do with it what he wished. If that prerogative was to believe he would someday do a restoration that was not an opportunity for others to unilaterally preempt. As such, any attempt to paint as heroes those that initially appropriated Kleve's property, along with those that knowingly furthered that appropriation, for facilitating a restoration is absolutely delusional.

 

This is the entire transcript of the motion Joe Ford filed to deny a Court Reporter be present. Ford wrote in his motion before the Appeal Court "recording what's said in the hearing would implead him from being creative with the free flow of ideas". His motion was denied.

Best Parts:

MR. SMITH (Lawson) to the Appeal Judge "That’s not our idea. And so we want to get this settled. Everybody else involved in this case is rich. We're not rich. Okay?
So if we don't get any money.... they don't need the money ...we need the money. And we don't get any money until this is over. So we want to get it over with."
Page 39, Bottom and Page 40

MR. RINEAR (Ford) to the Appeal Judge : "I disagree, Judge. There is case law... "

JUDGE DEWINE to Rinear : "Okay. We're just going to reverse a couple hundred years of appellate procedure, but that's fine." Page 17, Line 10-14
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Dear Sir,

I guess you can look at it that way if you like.

Let me see if I am getting this straight.

Kleve buys a super rare Ferrari, then in his words “takes all of the good stuff of it”, prior to discarding /selling the engine, he puts the useless parts inside a structure for proper storage while abandoning the frame outside in the woods to allow the elements to eat the frame tubes and all of the metal that holds the car together.

What are you saying sir?
Do you own a Ferrari? Are you willing to do that to your car?

The courts ordered Kleve to remove all of the Junk cars from all of the properties in May of 1988. The finding of the court was that the items were a nuisance and a health hazard and put children’s lives at risk that were playing on junk. It was the belief that the Kleve abandoned junk cars could have seriously hurt or even killed a child while playing on the junk.

There was also a problem with disease carrying rats/rodents because of the junk. The problem with these rodents in a situation like this is they pose a serious health risk.

Do you believe that you can BEAT your kids’ silly, and then put them under the stairwell in a closet while starving them? After beating them for years, your story is to explain that you were instilling good values in you children.

Well the same applies to that scenario… they are your kids.


Are you of the mindset that no one has the right to initiate an intervention to stop the insanity?

Well, this is where we both differ!

Did you know that in Italy this vehicle is referred to as a National Historical Treasure?

So, how could you ( if I am reading it correctly) condone the destruction of a National Italian Monument.

I am happy that the seller of the Ferrari #0384 rescued the last remaining part of the discarded Ferrari.

Personally, I wish that the Courts intervened much earlier to rectify this problem.

But they did! The exact same thing occurred in the 70’s and Kleve would not comply with the court order to remove the junks including the Ferrari that resulted in his arrest.

After Kleve’s arrested he was sent to the Cincinnati Workhouse Jail to serve a 6 month jail term. That jail term was for not complying with the ‘Court Order’ to dispose of the Kleve junks.

Now how is it that you gentlemen did not start a forum on the other cars Kleve left to rot in the Kleve collection?

What about the countless other cars that the State of Ohio crushed from the Kleve properties. Are you saying they were Stolen as well. Did the State of Ohio steal those valuable assets? They were taken as well. Or don’t you want to address that fact.

Where were the good Samaritans that could have stopped that?

Please forgive me since I have not yet posted the Kleve restoration vehicles sitting in perhaps the Kleve restoration shop. (Next post has the pictures)

I have interviewed the people living across the street from this mess. The ladies were so sad and distraught they could not escape this mess since there houses would never sell.

Who would buy a house looking across the street from the pictures I am going to post?

I have a different outlook than you do and forgive me for telling it the way it was and is.

These are very real people that were subjected to this disgusting mess and suffered greatly for over 50 years. They too valued their possessions. (Houses)

I know there was a real sense of relief when the State of Ohio finally came in and stopped this insanity.

 

A picture is worth a thousand words.

Now let’s look at what has not been posted by Ocean Joe in regard to the Kleve Museum pieces.

The readers all have a mental image of the condition of the rare and beautiful descriptive finds we have had the privilege to read about located in the Kleve collection.

These vehicles were also going to be restored by Mr. Kleve if you believe what you read here.

Now it would be down right deceitful NOT to allow the F-chat readers to see what all of the fuss has been about.

Remember back in the beginning of all of this…. when we were introduced to Karl Kleve via Ocean Joe.
He posted some artists renderings of cars that we are to believe are a part of the Kleve collection.

The only problem is the cars are not real and the artists rendering omitted details such as door handles and a logical way to enter and exit the vehicle. Go ahead … go back and take a look.

Now, the attached pictures were entered into evidence at the Atlanta Federal Trial preceding that was heard in 1989.

The people in the courtroom were in disbelief when I introduced the photos that I am attaching. The whole courtroom could not believe what they just witnessed. Then the prosecution and the defense went at it just at that precise moment. Judge Murphy slammed his gavel down for order in the courtroom and ……Well; I will let Ocean Joe tell you the rest since he seems to re-interpret all that is said on this site.

Oh, by the way, the FBI never saw a picture of the Hulk. That is until I brought them to court.

The FBI could not imagine in their wildest dreams it was a Hulk by the wonderfully worded description that Kleve gave them.

They initially believed that the 1955 Grand Prix racer 4.9 just needed the wheels put back on and perhaps a battery charge by the description you have seen on the 1/24/1989 Kleve complaint.

Well no more words, lets make this a picture story fantasy.

Now that you are witnessing “The Kleve Collection” would you say these are ABANDONED JUNKS or are they potentially Museum artifacts? I took this picture in March 1989 and reserve the rights to my photographs. No reproduction allowed unless in writing.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Amazing...this is the "NEW and devastating evidence" the O.J. was holding to himself?

BTW, does everyone here know that Ferrari offered a blue tone in the mid 90's called "Blue Swaters"?

 

Couldn't agree more JK, I love how certain parties try to claim they did the right thing by stealing a car. I have only ever visited a court once but if ever I do for real I will print those comments and see what a judge might think. But your honor "I didnt steal it, I saved it". And the oscar for best actor in a comedy goes to.........

I wish OJ all the best in dealing with and to these scumbags, fraudsters and schysters