|
Site Partners: | Veloce Books | OldRacingCars.com |
26 Apr 2007, 16:36 (Ref:1901043) | #76 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 511
|
Does this mean the car is now in Australia?
When I saw it in an underground garage in Monaco, after the Coys sale, the person with me (initials AB, I am sure you all know who I mean!) said that in his opinion it was probably a BT18. The Coys sale catalogue described it as chassis FL-8-65 however, as you say, the chassis plate clearly states FL-9-65. How Coys could describe it as chassis FL-8 beats me, being such a reputable company. I understand that the ACM letter saying the car would be eligible if entered for the historic GP was written on the assumption that it was chassis FL-8-65 (as described in the request sent to them), which ran in F1 albeit non-championship. Anyway I hope the buyer in Australia picked it up cheap; I am sure he will have lots of fun racing the car. Marcus |
||
|
26 Apr 2007, 18:09 (Ref:1901097) | #77 | |||
OldRacingCars.com
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,942
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
27 Apr 2007, 06:37 (Ref:1901433) | #78 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,184
|
Denis I don't have anything that would help, I should have sent you a reply sooner, sorry. Below is what Coys said (as has been mentioned 2 pages earlier), perhaps the Italian owner can give the name and address of the Kiwi he bought it from.
Chassis FL 8 65 is recorded as having competed in various non championship Formula 1 races in 1965 including Goodwood and Brands Hatch where it was piloted by two well known drivers, John Caldwell and Rodney Bloor as well as reaching a 17th place at the Silverstone trophy of that year. The car was subsequently shipped out to New Zealand where it enjoyed a second racing career and it was from here that its current Italian owner acquired the car. In his hands the car has enjoyed a (recent) nut and bolt restoration and has competed successfully in a number of important European Historic Races. Today it is presented in immaculate condition and is accompanied by FIA paperwork and a letter from 'Automobile Club de Monaco' stating its eligibility to compete in this years 'Grand Prix Historique'. Do Coys have any responsibility for the description they write or is it journalistic free range? Andrew |
||
|
27 Apr 2007, 08:11 (Ref:1901481) | #79 | |||
OldRacingCars.com
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,942
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
27 Apr 2007, 11:15 (Ref:1901582) | #80 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 511
|
Quote:
Marcus |
|||
|
27 Apr 2007, 15:40 (Ref:1901717) | #81 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,176
|
Elsewhere in the auction world this would be a wholly reprehensible [and possibly illegal] act since it constitutes a mis-selling. It is the responsibility of the auction house to check provenance, rather than simply go on the description provided by the vendor. [though, of course, this is how a lot of art looted by the Nazi's subsequently got sold, because the auction houses took supplied provenance at face value] and there are now a large number of collectors having to return such works to rightful owners, and hopefully queuing up to sue lax auction houses
Chris |
||
__________________
'Some days you eat the bear, some days the bear eats you.' |
27 Apr 2007, 16:15 (Ref:1901727) | #82 | ||
OldRacingCars.com
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,942
|
How interesting.
If only there was an objective and independent research organisation that the auction houses could turn to for some sort of authentication... |
||
|
27 Apr 2007, 16:40 (Ref:1901752) | #83 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,493
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
27 Apr 2007, 21:40 (Ref:1901901) | #84 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,184
|
Quote:
If there has been any misrepresentation that is not legal then the new owner certainly has the tenacity and ability to seek justice. -and independent research organisation, my my, could start a web site too. |
|||
|
7 May 2007, 10:31 (Ref:1908234) | #85 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 31
|
Brabham coys
I can assure all you guys with absolute certanty that the purchaser of this vehicle believed it to be a BT14 CHASSIS FL-8-65 based on the in formation supplied by Coys.
IT was not untill the car arrived in Australia that any thing else was even considered. I personally unloaded the vehicle from the container and was shocked when I saw the chassis plate. Some very high priced lawers have been consulted on the matter and Coys approached in regard to misrepresentation and responsibility. Coys answer was direct and blunt. They deny any responsibility,want nothing to do with the car,And will not enter into any correspondance regarding the car. One problem is that the vehicle was purchased in Monaco,paid for in London,and we and the vehicle are now in Australia! We have been given legal advise saying that costs to run such a case could be in access of $200,000.00. So much for purchasing from a respected and reputable auction house. |
|
|
7 May 2007, 12:18 (Ref:1908289) | #86 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 952
|
Quote:
I've heard one of the UK (car specialist) auction houses suggest to someone who registers a complaint that they should read the small print which informs you that they do not guarantee the information in any way. In some countries they can't adopt such a cavalier attitude, but in the UK such behaviour is seemingly acceptable (as with other businesses e.g. the London stock exchange is notably less restrictive than some others). Apparently one auction house discovered that other countries laws are different when they pretended to sell a car at auction in France/Monaco. Having ran it up to a suitably impressive figure (over reserve), they discovered that they were obliged to pay the seller despite not having found a real buyer. The attendant 'huissier' (Government appointed official, who is present at any French auction) confirmed that the hammer price was a legally binding contract. (n.b. one reason why it wasn't surprising that the recent Auto-Union auction never happened). |
|||
|
7 May 2007, 12:20 (Ref:1908292) | #87 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 952
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
7 May 2007, 17:02 (Ref:1908418) | #88 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,176
|
Peter
What I meant was that an auction house would [or should] apply different standards for a work of art. [And in some cases they actually still do, having been sufficiently burned...] If I show up at Christies with a small Matisse under my arm and say 'I'd like to flog this, old chap' they would actually do a little work to check that a: it was real and b: I had legal title to the goods I was selling. It seems to me that the people who auction classic cars couldn't tell if a car was faked or not and mostly don't give a flying whatever about provenance or accurate description. Perhaps this is because even at their most expensive classic cars are relatively cheap compared to fine art [or not so fine art when a Peter Doig sells for 7 million], more likely it betrays a general attitude in the auction houses to clients and objects alike, that typifies a booming market. Chris |
||
__________________
'Some days you eat the bear, some days the bear eats you.' |
7 May 2007, 22:38 (Ref:1908665) | #89 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 31
|
Quote:
It should be noted that Coys Euro office that conducted the sale is also in Padova Italy ! As per Mr Luptons comments we believe the car to be a genuine Brabham and would like to rebuilt it to it original specification ie:BT14/15/16/etc so any informationon its history would be most appreciated. We cannot use the car in Australia unless we can prove its history to be 100% true and correct. |
||
|
8 May 2007, 09:00 (Ref:1908833) | #90 | ||
OldRacingCars.com
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,942
|
FL-2-65 - John Butterworth 1965-68 - Dennis Chorley 1969-70 ... missing 1971 ... Geoff Inglis in 1972 ... Devon in 1978 ... John Ampt (Aus) - Noel Robson (Aus) 1988; retained 2006
Autosport 9 Jul 1970 p50: "Dennis Chorley has returned to the hills in the blown Brabham BT14/21 which he damaged at Shelsley last year". |
||
|
8 May 2007, 09:37 (Ref:1908847) | #91 | |||
OldRacingCars.com
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,942
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
8 May 2007, 09:54 (Ref:1908856) | #92 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 77
|
Fl-2-65
Allen, That's really interesting,as I helped my friend,John Ampt, when he had the car,and said to him at the time that we should correct the bodywork,as it had a BT21 nose.It's easy to spot,the lower edge of the windscreen where it fits on to the sides of the cockpit is straight,whereas the BT14/15/16 has quite a curve. Noel Robson still has the car,and it still has the BT21 nose.
Denis |
||
|
8 May 2007, 17:32 (Ref:1909190) | #93 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 952
|
Quote:
I agree they seem to put more effort into researching paintings & antiques, maybe it is because by their nature cars will very rarely be totally original, or as you say cars simply aren't worth so much of their extremely valuable time But I doubt that they put as much effort into artworks as you would hope - they also tend to use a limited number of experts who can sometimes be biased and possibly not possessing a great deal of expertise. (n.b. A friend's brother apparently made a piece of "Bugatti" furniture, the auction house expert's main criteria for authentication was where did it come from (e.g. documentation) rather than investigating the item itself - of course that happens a lot with cars as well). How could you value an expensive painting that has been repainted (!), or had the canvas (chassis) replaced!! (Actually I think it has been known for the canvas or whatever it is painted on to be replaced?). Given that sort of thing happens all the time it would be risky to stand behind all the statements they are presented with, so total denial is safer. In the case of something like this Brabham where the auction house's total commission is 'only' around £5000 they clearly aren't making enough money out of the transaction for it to be worth their time investigating the car's history!!!!! Peter |
|||
|
8 May 2007, 17:48 (Ref:1909205) | #94 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 952
|
Quote:
I'm sure the car is a genuine Brabham, the problem will always be identifying which one it is. It should be possible to identify the model - upright and angled engines had the engine mounting points on the chassis in different places for example. BT14/15/16 had the drivers bulkhead made from pairs of tubes, the later version (BT18) used rectangular section tubing. BT14/15/16 used a shorter upright with the lower radius rod picking up part way up the chassis - later models had taller uprights picking up on the lower chassis rail. etc. Finding out which chassis number it is will be dependant on tracing the previous owners - and if you can't find the seller then that is tricky (a lawyer's letter to the auction house suggesting they at least find valid contact details for the seller (they should have his bank details and his bank might know where he is) should not cost a fortune). If you need to know the complete ownership history of cars before you are allowed to run, I suspect you will find that some cars in Australia might have somewhat artificial histories. It would be more sensible if the authorities just insisted that the car is to original specification - in an ideal world everyone would know all the histories but that doesn't happen, the rules should be based around reality rather than some eutopian fantasy. |
|||
|
10 May 2007, 22:13 (Ref:1910681) | #95 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 31
|
BT14
Dear Peter,
your comments may be quite valid,however thats the way it is here in Australia. You are required to have a complete and documented history of a vehicle before you can get a log book to race it in historics.This history needs to include,signed statements from previous owners/mechanics etc,photographic history/magazine articals etc etc etc.The vehicle must also race in the identical specification that it raced in in the period,eg;motor gearbox wheel width etc. So as you can see and as we want to race this car,without any history it is worthless to us as it sits in the corner of the shed and cannot turn a wheel. |
|
|
11 May 2007, 08:58 (Ref:1910900) | #96 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 952
|
Quote:
The principle behind these rules is wonderful, but they don't reflect reality and certainly don't mean the cars in Australia are all genuine. Many years ago a friend was surprised when helping load (for NZ) a well known historic race car to discover that the paint on the chassis was still wet!! The paperwork would have been well and truly dry though. If you turned to forgery (or cloning) I doubt you'd be the first!! |
|||
|
11 May 2007, 09:43 (Ref:1910927) | #97 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 31
|
Please understand ,I did not buy this vehicle. It was purchased by a client/friend of mine who has no history in vehicles such as these.
He was given a complete history of the vehicle by 'Coys', the history for FL-8-65! It all appeared kosher to him,in his own words to me he had complete trust in 'Coys' and their reputation. That was his first mistake. |
|
|
11 May 2007, 14:50 (Ref:1911143) | #98 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 952
|
Quote:
Or was it the authorities who raised the question about its identity? If they haven't raised the matter (e.g. read this thread!) will they stop him using it?? If Coys are being unhelpful, it might be worth telling them that you will report the facts to all the magazines that they advertise in (most will be happy to report a story that could be of benefit to their readers) - if you are careful to only report facts then you can't lose a court case, if they then wanted to start proceedings against your customer that would avoid him having to bear the costs of starting the case. |
|||
|
11 May 2007, 21:42 (Ref:1911340) | #99 | |||||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,184
|
Quote:
Quote:
The documentary evidence gets circulated to state registrars, so the evidence is very carefully checked by a lot of people. Its no good just to claim that this is the truth because Joe Bloggs told me so. The problem lies in the fact that here they don’t run the car to comply with the formula rules in which it participated originally, rather it has to run in the exact spec it did, but not necessarily in its first year, you can pick the year, or do as I did and pick two years and have an “either or” situation. Now that makes life difficult for some, and on occasions like this car, impossible. Until it can be established how the car ran at some stage in its competitive life it won’t be granted a Certificate of Description. (I don’t mean to confuse everyone but there are two documents this car will need, the C of D and a Log Book, the latter is used to record every race and any mechanical infringement.) Will ‘they’ read this forum? Yup you bet, in fact one helped start this chassis section of Ten Tenths. Quote:
Andrew |
|||||
|
12 May 2007, 16:20 (Ref:1911736) | #100 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 952
|
Quote:
The big difference now is that he doesn't have a clue where he is starting from. Finding the vendor would be easiest, or someone who worked on the car recently - there has to be a limited number of possibilities in Italy. Could be worth asking Monaco if they did receive an application for this car, if so who was it from..... And check with the Italian RAC who applied for the papers, where was the car at the time etc. HGPCA are another organisation that might have received an entry from it. Alongside that, trying to embarass Coys into being more helpful should at least make the buyer feel a bit better. |
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Brabham BT 2 | Wayne Mitchell | The Chassis History Archive | 169 | 21 Oct 2018 17:38 |
GPL-Which Brabham do you have? | pirenzo | Virtual Racers | 15 | 24 Mar 2003 11:38 |
Brabham | Trimar | Racing Technology | 1 | 9 May 2001 04:31 |