History Stolen 57 Chevy found after 30 years headed for down under

Good story.

 

Great story, I guess there's hope!
Now go out and look for my 57 Ragtop, stolen out of Raceway Park, NJ, in 1979.
I put all my heart and soul, AND money into it while going to school, and working a practically full time job.
I was heartbroken when it got taken!
Now go look!

 

I remember when it was stolen. Good luck getting back.

 

Hope the thief can be traced now!

 

Bottom line, its his car, it was taken from him, he should get it back. He owes nothing to the person who bought it, restored it etc. The Thief is the one who fucked everyone over, not the victim. Car theft sucks, for all involved parties. I've had two of my cars sold from storage lots, and helped a friend retrieve his stolen 69 Camaro. Never felt any empathy for anyone involved,still don't. I did get my cars back.

 

And...
This is the prime reason to make sure the VIN # on the title matches the one on the car that you are buying. Just one digit off actually will 'wash' the stolen vehicle VIN, which is what happened here.
Skip is a good guy, and I got to see the car when the transporter stopped by, it did look pretty nice.

---John

 

I export cars from California to Europe for living.

1000s of cars getting shipped worldwide from Long Beach. 1 out of 1000 vehicle gets recovered as stolen. The reason is that the DMV computer didn't cover more than 5 to 7 years, the US Custom records getting never deleted.

The Highway Patrol has the complete info as well, but they would not tell you, unless you bring the car.

In other words, there is no real protection buying a car with a DMV clean title. The best thing is to have some friend in the force...

Years ago I bought a 68 Charger, got the new title in my name, did some work to it, put it in the container, Highway Patrol and Customs pulled it out. I had to buy it back from the insurance who payed off the guy 5 years ago. Put it on ebay, because my german customer didn't wanted it anymore, listed it on Ebay. Next thing is unreal. The guy it got stolen from recognized his car on ebay, called the cops, they knew about it. So he bought his car back from me! Crazy!! But the best part was, when he was trying to get it registered. My title on my name got taken by the Highway Patrol and the orig. title I got from the insurance didn't get accepted by the DMV. At the end we worked it out. Telling you, big mess out there.

 

I don't know this guy too well but I've had a few conversations with him. He is not the type of guy to "do the right thing" and work with the last owner for a settlement. It wouldn't surprise me if he didn't take the precautions to not have it stolen again.

 

How about tracking down the original 'thief' to do the right thing? Forcrysakes some of these posts make it sound like the owner is at fault & needs to set things right. Bullshit. The car was stolen from him, he got it back. How in the hell does that make him responsible for what happened (30yrs) in between?

 

x2!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Still hoping my '55 will show up that was stolen in 1971! Maybe there's still a possibility!

 

that guy sure is lucky,
all this stolen talk makes me sick!! it something thats on my mind alot and i live in a place that this type of stuff doesnt happen, but you never know

 

Now if you like it or not, this post is the 100 percent truth and right way to look at it. Couldn't have said it better myself!

 

Settlement my @$$! The previous owner should go after who he got it from and start the chain back that way. Everyone had their own idea of " the right thing to do", but I bet if you were in that mans shoes you would change your tune. The mans car was stolen, he got it back, bottom line. The condition is not a issue. Unbelievable some of the peoples way of thinking in this world.

 

I miss a 69 caddy , so i know how it is if your car get stolen . But what i allways wonder is also the other side . Imagine you buy legaly a car without any doubts , restore it , kustomize it, maybe make a child on the backseat Then you meet a guy and he says oh ... this was my car, first you think he sold it , then you realize what he mean , cops come on the place , loyars war and and and finaly your loved car is gone ?

 

Thanks for sharing. Good news for a change


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

EXACTLY RIGHT.

The VIN should also be double checked on the title that is issued after it has been transferred. Sometimes a mistake is made by the department that transfers titles. The Illinois Secretary of State mis-entered the VIN of my 56 Chevy, when I transferred the title. I had to have the local county sherriff inspect the VIN and the title to straighten it out. This was in 1994, so it wasn't a big problem, but it could be tougher to fix, today.

 

yeah I could see that working.Maybe.Costly and messy with plenty in it for the lawyers. However..IF he got paid out by insurance then it really wasn't his anymore. Shoulda gone to the insurance company by rights.

But I can see your point if it was uninsured when stolen he should get it back...but what of all the components now on it that weren't there like the eng/trans,etc?

 

Does anyone really think the thief used his real name or registered the car in his name????
Even if he was caught, which will not happen since the case is closed, the statute of limitations on GTA has expired years ago. He got away with it.

 

The car wasn't running so it wasn't insured. He's entitled to it back. Follow the money and paper trail and you'll find the theives. As far as the condition and drive train, like I said go after who had the car before you. They sold you a stolen car, they are liable. Who makes up for the last thirty years this man could have been enjoying his car or building it the way he wanted it. Now he's sick and probly can't build it so he should get to enjoy it. Goes back to simple rules we learned growing up, if it ain't yours don't touch it, and one of the first things my old man taught me--- buyer beware. I ll tell you right now, I'd never buy a car with one letter or number not matching the vin. That's a huge red flag. Id tell the owner to get it corrected before I bought it. The person who put the money in the car should have got it straightened out first.

 

I still don't get this train of thought. WTF is the guy supposed to do? Go back down the line to each & every previous owner who (knowingly or not) bought a stolen car? THEIR loss is HIS responsibility? REALLY?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for doing the right thing, but I'm just not seeing it in this case. Every previous owner had the option to run the numbers for their own protection. That obviously didn't happen somewhere down the line. OTOH, maybe it was a known fudged #, ending up in a shipping container never to be seen in this country again.

 

I can see that happening, and why shouldn't the original owner pony up for any improvements made as long as the 'previous owner' can prove they made them?

In this case, what was stolen was admitted to be a engineless body in need of a full rebuild. If the person it was recovered from has proof that the car was bought in good faith and can document the repairs done, why shouldn't they be able to recover those costs?

This is similar to a 'bonded title' deal where the previous owner can't be found. In places where this is allowed, the state issues you a conditional title, you do due diligence to contact the previous owner but if you don't hear back from him within a set period, he loses all rights to the vehicle. But if he does contact you, he can retake possession BUT has to reimburse you for any documented repairs done.

Now in this case, it sounds like the person the vehicle was recovered from didn't do the restoration so had no documentation and the original owner won the lottery. But making the assumption that any owners after the initial thief were also thieves is hardly fair and ethically IMO the original owner owes the guy something....

 

I was quite interested in the legal $ side of , so I spoke to a CHP officer re this case , any work or improvements to a stolen vehicle are forfeited to the original owner ,even if the vehicle was purchased in good faith , the vehicle is to be returned to the original owner in the state it is recovered . the people who restored the vehicle have to follow up with the people they got the car from and so on . it doesn't sound fair but it is the law

 

hey fleet-master in most states the "insured" maintains ownership of stolen vehicles, and if not ,has the option to buy back stolen or totaled cars for the best salvage bid or (as in this case) the companies payout which would have been a few hundred dollars---owner wins out ...

 

ok yeah I've heard of guys buying their car back off the insurance company.This sure woulda been a different story had the 57 been returned to the original owner as a gutted shell ...

 

The original owner owes NOTHING to ANYONE! He lost his car to a thief who sold it to subject A he did repairs and improvements and sold it to subject B he in turn did some repairs and improvements and sold it to subject C but the law found it, and returned it to it's rightful owner! So how in the heck could the original owner be liable for any of the work he did not authorize anyone to do? I say it's the reward he gets for missing his car for thirty years! If anyone wants paid for money spent they have to get it from the person that possessed the car before them! BUYER BE WARE!!! CYA!!

 

Exactly.

 

If the car had four prior owners ,does that mean three of them could be charged with buying & recieving stolen property?

Given the fact that the statute of limitations has expired,just something else to think about,although the prosecuting attorney more than likely would refuse to issue warrants.

 

I think this whole story/thread is ironic given how many posts are on here about how to title that "barn/field/salvage find", usually looking for the "easy" way.

No matching paper, no deal..plain and simple.

 

There's law and then there's principle/morality. Yeah, the law says that the original owner gets a tricked out car that he had nothing to do with repairing. But what's the principled solution? Folks love to follow the law when it gives them a net gain, spurn it when they feel its a net loss. Ignore the law, what feels right? If that last guy is the one that did most all of that work, go talk to him and figure it out together. If the previous owner did his due diligence and now finds himself on the skids, be upstanding and work out a deal. I wouldn't feel right if someone stole my heap and some honest guy who got had on down the line was out 75k after restoring it, especially it not being worth even 1/10 in its current state. It's easy to say the previous owner was guilty and just follow the letter of the law, when law dictates the minimum level of behavior expected from society.


Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!