Concourse Dissapointment

[bmcecosse]

I too pointed out to him that it is NOT a 1959 car...

[The vast minority]

So we see it does matter.

The owner has ended the auction "no longer available"

It's a great shame for him, as a seller he needed to be aware that there appear to be anomalies with the vehicle if he is to avoid future problems, the like of which the last seller will now likely be facing.

If he is concerned as a seller now he has been informed of the potential issues, then he certainly would have been as a buyer it is fair to expect and probably would not have concluded the purchase had he been aware that it looks dodgy. Again, this shows that it matters.

Anyone whom considers that cars with what appear to be false identities don't matter should ask themselves this. Would it matter if they had themselves inadvertently bought a car with a potentially false identity. Of course it would, it would matter because you felt you had been conned if the car turned out to be false and it would matter because you could not sell again without knowingly selling a car that was dodgy.

It may be that the seller can determine a legally acceptable reason that causes this car to present as it does. I'm sure you all share my view that this would be the best possible outcome as it clearly is a lovely car whatever the facts surrounding the anomalies.

I hope the guy sorts it out and can sell with a clear conscience.

PS, in some photos there is an owners club sticker in the driver side sliding window. In other photos, there is not. Possibly therefore once belonged to a member and may be known to the club somehow???? Worth pointing out as may help the guy if someone knows something about it.

[ianmack]

Not only the risk of buying a car with a dodgy identity, there's also the risk of having your legitimate car stolen by someone who has a v5 and plates to disguise it with so he can sell it.

[The vast minority]

Not only the risk of buying a car with a dodgy identity, there's also the risk of having your legitimate car stolen by someone who has a v5 and plates to disguise it with so he can sell it.

Exactly, I really don't understand the "does it matter" brigade.

It sure would if it affected them

[taupe]

If this car does have an identity crisis the owner can probably regularise it by applying for an age related registration through the owners club assuming it still has a chassis number.

Taupe

[bmcecosse]

Possibilities are ; It may have been rebuilt ~ 1966/67 into a new bodyshell after an accident - BUT - were Traveller shells ever available from BMC? And - would it have been worthwhile rebuilding a 6 year old Traveller into a new shell back in the day ? Or - it may have been stolen, and the identity of a 'scrap' 1959 Traveller applied to it. Or - (and frankly least likely) someone may have wanted an 'MOT free' car - and so has applied the identity of a 1959 Traveller to this later car.

[les]

Provided a car is reshelled with an identical model body how would anyone know ? Be it a new she'll or second hand.
Assuming of course, it wasn't done by a cowboy.

[taupe]

Les

That's true other than the stamped chassis number, but this is clearly a shell later than 57, indeed it is likely a 64 onwards cab and bulkhead due to various clear identifying features....so the shell is not 'identical' in this case.

Taupe

[bmcecosse]

The point is - it's NOT LEGAL unless using a brand new shell that has never been registered on the road.

[les]

Les

That's true other than the stamped chassis number, but this is clearly a shell later than 57, indeed it is likely a 64 onwards cab and bulkhead due to various clear identifying features....so the shell is not 'identical' in this case.

Taupe

I understand this case is different, I was thinking in general if the circumstances were as I described.
I'm not disputing the legal side of things but proving the vehicle was reshelled would be impossible, again not referring to this particular case.

[ManyMinors]

Up for sale on ebay again already (!) with a Company called TA Classics in Rugby for £8995.
Maybe they are the company the previous seller bought it from.
This car is at least late 1967 judging by the position of the upper seatbelt mountings which changed around that time.
The new photos show that the car does have the earlier car's chassis number fitted but whoever did it seems to have got it crooked!
It isn't a "shell change". Almost every part of the car shows it to be a late 1960s example. There were many many small changes during the late 1950s and early 1960s.

[POMMReg]

Presumably it has a "SEE ENGINE" box below the vin stamped box?

A vin plate only displays a vehicle id AND which factory it was built at - whether it remains ON the original motah is anyone's guess!

[bmcecosse]

I have asked the seller for an explanation of the car's age... http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Morris-Minor- ... SwKtlWqkRL

[plastic_orange]

I think the term 'Valuable registration number' may be the main reason for it's 1959 ID

Pete

[philthehill]

Whilst it may be or is illegal to change body/chassis details currently - was there ever a time that you could change a body/chassis so long as you filled in the relevant change section of the log book and sent the details of the changes to what is now DVLA who would issue a revised log book /registration document to the registered owner.
I have it in the back of my mind that at one time you could change anything so long as you filled in the relevant change section of the log book and sent it off to DVLA for amendment.
Comments appreciated.
Phil

[bmcecosse]

I doubt that - engine capacity and number, and body colour - yes! But I doubt you could change the age of manufacture...

[John Naylor]

I asked and got a reasonable response but I think they don't understand. Could be quite a problem for a trader!

[plastic_orange]

A lot of folk have a deluded opinion of the value of a plate.

Pete

[bmcecosse]

But seriously - how easy/difficult is it to fit the early glovebox lids to the later dash ?

[ManyMinors]

It isn't THAT difficult because although the later lids are bigger, the glovebox holes in the dashboard itself are the same original size, so the earlier lids will fit straight in. You'd need to transfer all the catches too of course. Biggest job would be welding/filling up the holes where the later chrome trims and rubber stops etc were fitted and then respraying the dashboard.

As I said in an earlier post, the givaway is that whoever did this has retained the later switch positions. On the later cars, bacause of the larger glovebox lids, the switches were moved closer together and this is still the case. The new pictures show that the earlier wiper and light switches have been fitted but the choke cable remains in the position where the starter pull would be on a "real" 1959 car.

As for the motive behind it, surely if it were done for the financial gain of the registration number, then the registration number would no longer be on it!!?? It would have been sold on or at least placed "on retention" long ago.