Patrice, You do not know the whole story, and it has never been told in Belgium. Here are a few more facts: In 1989, during the FBI investigation of the crime against Karl Kleve, the FBI estimated the value of the stolen portion of Karl Kleve's Ferrari 0384AM at $500,000, and in 1989 estimated the restored value at $1,000,000 - $1,500,000. I have those 1989 FBI reports by the FBI special agent. In late 1989, the FBI arrested two men for the theft, and they plea bargained and admitted stealing part of Karl Kleve’s Ferrari from his property in Cincinatti, Ohio in December of 1988. I have copies of those 1989 FBI documents. Also in 1989, the FBI documents show that the FBI arrested Guy Anderson in connection with the theft. Guy Anderson was aquitted due to a hung jury – meaning the prosecutor could not convince a Georgia jury of Guy Anderson’s guilt. The prosecutor decided to not retry the case. Estate documents show that Kleve never sold his car. Karl Kleve died at the age of 90 in 2003. Estate documents show that Karl Kleve proposed to sell his rights for $2,500,000 in 1999, but that the undisclosed secret buyer did not agree. Karl Kleve died in possession of the many original parts and the legal Ohio title, telling his three daughters that one day he would get the stolen portion of his car back. More later. Joe *
Joe, on tourne en rond... Michel Kruch/l'Exception Automobile n'a pas volé la voiture et ne peut être poursuivit pour recel d'objet volé, puisqu'il a légalement payé 4.500 $ pour une épave non roulante et incomplète... Il bénéficie de la "bonne foi"..., car il a reçu une facture authentque et comptabilisée... Ayant été informé du bruit que faisait Karl Kleve aux USA concernant une Ferrari de plus d'un million de dollars, il s'est présenté spontanément à la police qui est venue examiner l'extraordinaire Ferrari, s'attendant à découvrir le Saint-Graal... et ils ont été déconfit en voyant qu'il s'agissait d'un bloc de ferraille totalement pourri et rouillé... La facture de 4.500 dollars se justifiait totalement. Finalement, lorsque Guy Anderson (WorldwideExchange) a payé les 4.500 dollars perçus et qu'il s'est avéré qu'il n'avait pas touché un million de dollars, l'affaire a été enterrée et la justice belge, prévenue a libéré (desaisi) l'épave. Michel Kruch (L'Exception Automobile) ayant légalement récupéré SON bien (l'épave) il était donc libre de le revendre, ce qu'il a fait directement à Jacques Swaters via Philippe Lanksweert. Vous avez beau brandir et dire ce que vous voulez, en Europe et plus particulièrement en Belgique, c'est comme ça et ça ne changera pas... Le fond du problème, c'est simplement que Jacques Swaters en récupérant légalement le Title en l'achetant en même temps que les pièces restantes, aurait la possibilité de sur-valoriser la réplique qu'il a fait construire à l'identique de ce qu'était 0384 en 1954... Tandis que Karl Kleve tente la même manoeuvre dans l'autre sens (récupérer la transformation de l'épave)..., sauf que ce n'est pas une attaque directe mais une action reconventionnelle en réponse à l'attaque judiciaire de Jacques et Florence Swaters qui estiment avoir acheté le solde des pièces et le Title... C'est une nuance importante... Il n'y a donc plus d'action pour voiture volée autre qu'aux USA et en ce qui concerne la Belgique, la Ferrari au look de 0384 n'est pas la 0384 mais une réplique de 0384, Jacques Swaters ayant bien expliqué aux enquéteurs "que ce n'était pas la même voiture"... Ce n'est que par des subtilités et des manoeuvres et en tronquant malhonnètement la réalité, et ce, venant des avocats de Katrin Kleve, qu'on finit par croire en des faux et des changements de plaquettes..., la réalité est toute autre. Je pense, aux vu de tout ce qui a été dit, qu'en finale, Jacques Swaters a finalement obtenu le Title de l'Ohio pour 0384, je pense aussi qu'il a acheté le moteur 0384 qui équipait un bateau de vitesse aux USA..., donc, il a l'épave avec son châssis, le bon moteur, et le Title... qu'il a placé ou est occupé de placer sur la réplique qu'il a fait construire... Dans ces conditions... et comme sa réplique n'est pas l'épave restaurée... je pense que Florence et Jacques Swaters n'en ont plus rien à faire... La bataille se résume à savoir qui, parmis les intermédiaires a escroqué qui... En finale, sans doute que Karl Kleve a été filou en profitant d'une situation inespérée (et un bon avocat pourrait plaider qu'il a lui-même créé cette situation en incitant au vol tout en conservant suffisement d'éléments pour tenter d'anéantir l'acquéreur final...), sinon quel serait le fou qui laisserait une merveille de 1 million de dollars dans la terre et la boue, à ciel ouvert depuis près de 30 ans !!! En finale bis, sans doute que Jacques Swaters va réaliser un "coup fumant" une arnaque légale de premier plan en affirmant qu'il a restauré 0384 alors qu'il se contente de placer un numéro historique sur sa réplique... Tout cela pue la merde ! En tant que communauté Ferrari, vous devriez dès à présent bannir cette réplique pour éviter qu'un crime finit par payer en toute légalité... Vous devriez également vous interroger sur vous-même et remettre en question cette dévotion béate envers des pseudos personnages de légende qui ne sont en finale que des escrocs qui profitent de la bétise humaine...
Hi All, Just back from Goodwood, then to Maranello for nice dinners at the Montana -superb. Lord March really puts out the red carpet at Goodwood and all the legends were there. Stirl was at it again, and it was a grand time to see everyone as we all pass 80 now..... I didn't see Jacques, I hope he's ok. I see the saga on the 375AM goes on , as the price goes up. One thing I learned a long time ago....... "He who sells what isn't his'n, Must buy it back or go to pris'n" .... That's all Folks! Allen Markelson
Attorneys met last Fri (Oct 1) w Judge. Set the discovery, deposition, and motion cutoff dates, all prior to a pretrial conference May 3, 2011. Likely to slip a few months for hiccups and the like. The prior Motions (all 4, Swaters, Mine, Lawsons) were all denied. Judge made it clear to get on with discovery. Will post any new developments. 0384AM's "engine music" at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp4lz3V_M00 *
I apologize if this is discussed elsewhere on the site, I just found this article so am curious as to what happened about this "stolen" Ferrari.Aricle from Vermont Public Radio News by Ann Thompson Race Car Driver Sues For Title Of Stolen Rare Ferrari Listen Thursday, 08/12/10 12:00am - Morning Edition Ann Thompson An Ohio judge could decide as early as Thursday whether a Belgian race car driver and collector has any rights to one of the world's rarest of race cars or whether it belongs to a Cincinnati woman whose father first bought it in the 1950s. Right now, collector Jacques Swaters has possession of the 1954 Ferrari 375 Plus -- which could be worth as much as $15 million. But Karl Kleve's family has the title and spare parts to it in Cincinnati. Swaters, 84, says he restored it from a burned-out shell. It's now a shiny red one-seat convertible with lots of chrome. "Oh, I've done a terrific job on the car," he said. "We've been working for many, many years to restore the car. The company made only six of them, and just four of them are thought to still exist. In its time, the Ferrari 375 Plus was the fastest car on the track. Kleve's daughter, Kristi Kleve Lawson, says the car was stored outdoors in a Cincinnati lot with a hundred other old cars. She says her dad knew the car was valuable when he bought it in 1958 for $2,500. "He collected Duesenbergs; he collected Rolls-Royces. I know he had at least a dozen," she says. In 1988, Kleve discovered the Ferrari was stolen. Two Cincinnati men were later convicted of the crime, but the car had disappeared. Lawson says her dad searched for it for years, eventually tracking it down in Belgium. This is where the case gets a little more complicated. Lawson says Interpol got involved and convinced Belgium authorities that the car was stolen. She says it was eventually released to Swaters. But Swaters tells a different story: He says in 1990 a trader sold it to him for $100,000. "I was very interested because it was a very famous car," he says, "and then a little later I learned the car had been stolen, so I charged a lawyer to negotiate with the owner to make a settlement." Swaters says he paid Kleve more than $600,000 for the car, and that Kleve cashed the check. Kleve's daughter says her father never received any money, and if Swaters has a canceled check, her dad's signature must have been forged. She says finding the car had become an obsession for him. "This was his biggest project," she says. "By the time he passed away, he said this was the greatest auto theft that had ever occurred." Lawson's attorney Daniel Randolph says Swaters' lawsuit, which accuses Lawson of failing to transfer the title to him, should be dismissed. "We think it's not only unfair; we think it's a case of a person who's alleged to have millions and millions of dollars taking an anvil and trying to go after a Hamilton County resident," he says. "Kristi works two jobs to help her family continue to function as a family." Cincinnati judge Norbert Nadel will decide whether the statute of limitations has run out in the case and if this very famous and valuable car must be returned to Ohio. Ann Thompson reports for member station WVXU in Cincinnati.
There's a thread and this isn't "it"..it's down the page under the VIN number... Case is proceeding to trial now...after a few motions from all sides....
Ford's Motion for Injunction ordering car here for safekeeping and inspection with threshold basis of irreparable harm - denied. Lawson's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Join Necessary Parties (Daniels and Lancksweert) -denied. Lawson's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Real Party in Interest (Lancksweert not Swaters) - denied Swaters' Motion for Order Restraining Talk of the Case and Docs (gag order) - denied. * PS - I am co-owner with Kleve's heir, Mrs. Kristi Kleve-Lawson. I have my own attorneys in Ohio, as does Lawson. *
Jeez, Swaters might as well argue his case here too after posting all his document on his website. Jeff
Swaters does have document links with some documents. Conspicuously absent from the "documents" on wwwJacquesSwaters.com is a Power of Attorney that would authorize the private investigator to sign for Karl Kleve as they allege. You could have a mountain of documents, but if signed by the private investigator without authority, all you have is a mountain of worthless paper. That is a huge legal problem for Mr. Swaters, as so capably and specifically pointed out by attorney John Draneas, p31, paragraph entitled "The Scope of Daniel's Authority" in Keith Martin's Sports Car Market magazine, the October 2010 issue. * FYI - I have attempted and am attempting to have a meet in Europe with Swaters but so far he has not even replied. FYI - Swaters is now over 60 days late in complying with discovery to produce documents. * Actions speak louder than words. * Kristi Kleve Lawson's affidavit is a MUST READ. (See Defendant's Joint Memo in Reply) *
Thank you I didn't see those, but my point was that his web site looks to be set up just for Swaters to the web world his version of events. Even if he had the opening page for years, this case has taken priority over all the other tabs of information.
But why would Karl Kleve sign page 3 of a settlement agreement, whatever the disputed contents of pages 1 and 2, in advance of, and with the knowledge that Mark Daniels is listed as his Acting Agent just a couple of lines above his signature, and with no proviso or contradiction of that on the document? I'm not an attorney and not au fait with the finer points of law but that does seem strange to me that he was happy to sign that but now it is disputed that Mark Daniels was acting for him legitimately.
Scope of agency is what matters. When the principal defines what acts an agent is authorized to do, then that is all the agent can legitimately do. There is a June 16, 1999 Letter of Authority that described Daniel's scope of authority -- to negotiate, present offers, etc, but not more. Even if you have a document entitled Power of Attorney, it is still a matter of what powers are defined. So, when Lancksweert pays Daniels direct and gets him to sign off on everything, it is meaningless as against Kleve (i.e. does not bind Kleve) unless there is the written authority from Kleve. This scope of agency problem is not new to the courts. If they find that Lancksweert had the reasonable right to rely on an "apparent" agency, it at best makes Kleve responsible to refund to Lancksweert's money (if truly paid to Daniels), and since Lancksweert is Swaters' partner, that partnership is bound to what rights and benefits Lancksweert had. The whole Power of Attorney and scope of agency is something that will certainly be inquired into by the Ohio court. There is an Aug 18, 99 Power of Attorney, but there is a real problem with it. That is likely the reason why Swaters is not anxious to post it. It is so suspicious that it puts Lancksweert on notice that something is amiss with Daniels. The fact that on Sept. 2, 1999 Lancksweert still proceeded and then paid Daniels direct will also cut against Swaters, as that act too is highly suspicious. Stay tuned. There are many defects in the docs that I am sure will bubble to the surface in this forum, and then later in court. Put yourself in Kleve's shoes, see who did what when, and you will understand what really occurred. *
I also found the key point for me was not answered by Swaters timeline. Kleve reports the theft of the car to the Green Township Police Department and the FBI. "Sometime between 1985-89, the stolen car is transported to Atlanta, then to Belgium through a good faith purchase by LException Automobile, a Belgian auto trader. Belgian authorities seize the car in customs in 1989, investigate its ownership and find that it had been reported stolen by Kleve." So lets gloss over whether anyone knew if it was stolen or actually knew anything, and then if they knew nothing, why change the chassis number fir 10 years ? Tim
