• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-

Boyd pleads no contest

  • Thread starter Thread starter RogerC62
  • Start date Start date Aug 2, 2005
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last

RogerC62

Founding Member
Feb 2, 2000
833
11
38
Dayton, Ohio
Aug 2, 2005
#1
  • Aug 2, 2005
  • #1
There was a blip in Kitcar Magazine about Boyd pleading no contest to illegally titling more than a 1000 cars. Anyone else catch this elsewhere? Evidently he's been titling his cars illegally for years. I guess he's required to pay a fine and do community service plus lecture on proper titling procedures to the auto hobby industry.
 

68rustang

Active Member
Jan 17, 2003
1,537
0
36
Cleveland, OH
Aug 2, 2005
#2
  • Aug 2, 2005
  • #2
I heard something about it a few months ago. It was something about using original tiles for his "new" cars or fiberglass bodies or something like that. It is something many custom builders do but on a smaller scale than he does.
 

krash kendall

Active Member
Nov 19, 2004
1,258
0
36
Aldergrove, B.C. Canada
Aug 2, 2005
#3
  • Aug 2, 2005
  • #3
Here's a bit of the story. OCRegister
 

bigcat

start with the upper hole, and if more traction is
May 1, 2005
3,015
1
79
7200 feet
Aug 2, 2005
#4
  • Aug 2, 2005
  • #4
he got a slap on the wrist. but it comes to the question: when is a car not that car.....

its like you buy a hammer, and the handle breaks. you replace the handle. then the head breaks and you replace the head. is it still the same hammer?

if you got the title to a car, and want to fix it up. how much of that car can be replaced before its not that car...... change frame, motor, tranny, rear end, fenders, doors, 1/4s etc. what part of that car has to be there to make it that car? the VIN? i can cut the VIN out of another car, and weld that panel into this car. but which car is it?
 

65stanger

big blue fuzzy closet monster
Founding Member
Oct 25, 2001
3,885
1
58
In the Deepest, Darkest, corner of THE CLOSET, whe
Aug 3, 2005
#5
  • Aug 3, 2005
  • #5
Gee.........I've replaced just about everything on my car at one time or another.......does this mean my car isn't my car???




I'm soooooooo confused!
 

t_chelle16

Keeper of the closet key
Founding Member
May 8, 2002
3,610
0
0
Knob Noster, Mo.
Aug 3, 2005
#6
  • Aug 3, 2005
  • #6
Isn't the VIN associated with the frame?

Dad is rebuilding his motorcycle after wrecking it. Pretty much the only things original on it now are the gas tank, engine, & tranny (maybe a couple other minor things). We still consider it the same bike, but I believe that because he's got a new frame, he will have to get a new VIN for it (I could be wrong on that, he knows more about it than I do).

-Chelle
 

zookeeper

Founding Member
Aug 25, 2001
3,415
63
109
Rogue River, Oregon
Aug 3, 2005
#7
  • Aug 3, 2005
  • #7
I don't know about the rest of the country, but here in Ca, the DMV practically forces you to lie about any vehicle you bought. Here's an example: my Dad and I have built several Model A hot rods in the past 25+ years. The typical routine goes like this, you go into the DMV and tell them you have an old car that took you about 10 years to restore, and in the meantime you lost the title, etc. They ask you the vin# and you supply a number. After 7 years, California DMV dumps its records, so if it's not on their records (which it won;t be since you're using a made-up number) they have no choice but to issue you a new title for $7 which you need to have a police officer verify. Then it's about $34 for plates and your done. No smog check, no brake and light check by the CHP nazi stormtroopers, no nothing, just bolt on the plates and drive. Option 2 goes a bit differently, as one of our painfully honest freinds found out the hard way. You go to the DMV and tell them you built a car from parts and you'd like to register it. They will hand you a stack of papers that would choke a hippo and ask for sales reciepts proving where you got the frame, body, front axle, rear axle engine and trans. The old "it's been in my garage for months" story won't cut it. If you clear that hurdle, you get a permit to trailer your car to the CHP office for a VIN# verification and a brake and light check. If the engine is a year that needs a smog check (post-'73) then you get to have a smog check with all the stuff that motor came with, and you get to keep getting that check until it passes. The whole process could take weeks and then the car gets a "Special Construction" title which means the next owner gets to go through the whole smog check thing again. I've learned to lie (and not feel guilty about it!) to the DMV jackass brigade every chance I get and I don't begrudge a builder like Boyd for doing the same. Screw the red-tape-government run around...
 

StangDreamin'

Founding Member
Aug 10, 2002
583
0
16
2nd Ocotillo bush east of the Colorado River; Sout
Aug 3, 2005
#8
  • Aug 3, 2005
  • #8
I'm curious..... what's the difference between what Boyd did and what Sanderson Sales is doing with the GT500E??? How much of a rusty old 67-68 six cylinder fastback is left when it goes on sale as a TCP suspended, 427 Windsor-powered Shelby complete with "vintage" (but made last week) Shelby VIN tag on the inner fender???













































 

mdjay

Premium Sponsor
Dec 9, 2003
896
0
16
Las Vegas, NV
Aug 3, 2005
#9
  • Aug 3, 2005
  • #9
Sanderson doesn't do the GT500E Shelby's! They originally had the rights to the sale of them, but they lost it soon after.

It's Unique Performance and they somehow have the rights by Ford to issue a new VIN #

I guess Ford has a little more pull with the DMV than old Boyd!

He's was dancing and saving face, but come on now! "I did know it was illegal."

I guess I'll try that line if ever needed and claim
 

krash kendall

Active Member
Nov 19, 2004
1,258
0
36
Aldergrove, B.C. Canada
Aug 3, 2005
#10
  • Aug 3, 2005
  • #10
"Q. You pleaded no contest to obtaining vintage titles for brand-new, Coddington-built vehicles that were stylized replicas of 1930s-era Fords. In what way did you think this was OK?
A. What difference does it make? It's very obvious the car's made out of fiberglass. You're not really misrepresenting something. "


I think he's missing or avoiding the point here. He's built a brand new car with a made to order body, new frame and drivetrain yet it's being passed off on the paperwork as a vintage car. Obviously if he's building what looks like a '32 Ford, it is nice to have it registered as such and also not have the headaches of smog checking it. However, are passed customers of his going to be holding the bag now that their paperwork has been found to be counterfeit? What would their insurance carriers have to say about the matter in the event of a claim? And what happens when a young dreamer buys an old model A out of a field two states over, fixes it up and goes to register it only to find out a customer of Boyd's has been driving the car for years? - Who has title to it then? The car somehow is two places at once.
 
L

limey66

Member
Sep 23, 2004
408
0
16
Northampton, England
Aug 4, 2005
#11
  • Aug 4, 2005
  • #11
In the UK, we have very strict rules about what you can do to a car before it ceases to be what it left the factory as. I guess this is because we have age-related registration. We do get Cobra replicas that are registered as 1973 Jaguars for example, but it really isn't playing the game - say you comitted a hit and run, and the witnesses didn't get the licence number just a description of a green cobra - the car is registered as a blue XJ12 and will never be found!

If you build a car from second hand parts in the UK you can use the original title if a certain percentage of the parts are from that car, but that normally has to include the chassis.

Krash's point about two cars with the same title is a good reason for not doing it.

Boyd was a bad lad, and knew exactly what he was doing - sure we've all been doing it for years, and will continue to do so. He's put his hand up and taken the rap.
 
R

Renato

New Member
Aug 18, 2004
36
0
0
Aug 4, 2005
#12
  • Aug 4, 2005
  • #12
This is going to get more interesting once those '67 complete crate fastback bodies become available.
 

t_chelle16

Keeper of the closet key
Founding Member
May 8, 2002
3,610
0
0
Knob Noster, Mo.
Aug 4, 2005
#13
  • Aug 4, 2005
  • #13
Renato said:
This is going to get more interesting once those '67 complete crate fastback bodies become available.
Click to expand...

I think they already come with a VIN.

-Chelle
 

iskwezm

10 Year Member
May 24, 2005
4,159
20
79
Rowland Heights,California
Aug 4, 2005
#14
  • Aug 4, 2005
  • #14
Anyway you look at it,Boyd is an ass,and a even bigger one in person.Ill be the first person in front of his shop(i live a couple of miles away) when his doors close,they already did once when he was in Stanton and filed a BK,but kept his mansion in the hills and all his property and then reopened under his sons name a few month later.
 

Max Power

Active Member
Jul 31, 2003
1,774
1
36
St Paul
Aug 4, 2005
#15
  • Aug 4, 2005
  • #15
t_chelle16 said:
Isn't the VIN associated with the frame?

Dad is rebuilding his motorcycle after wrecking it. Pretty much the only things original on it now are the gas tank, engine, & tranny (maybe a couple other minor things). We still consider it the same bike, but I believe that because he's got a new frame, he will have to get a new VIN for it (I could be wrong on that, he knows more about it than I do).

-Chelle
Click to expand...

T_chelle, bikes are different than cars. Bikes have the VIN welded onth the frame, as it is usually the last thing anybody will replace. Most car frames don't have the VIN on them, as far as I know. At least it's not consistant...
 

t_chelle16

Keeper of the closet key
Founding Member
May 8, 2002
3,610
0
0
Knob Noster, Mo.
Aug 4, 2005
#16
  • Aug 4, 2005
  • #16


I stand corrected.

-Chelle
 

StangDreamin'

Founding Member
Aug 10, 2002
583
0
16
2nd Ocotillo bush east of the Colorado River; Sout
Aug 4, 2005
#17
  • Aug 4, 2005
  • #17
mdjay said:
Sanderson doesn't do the GT500E Shelby's! They originally had the rights to the sale of them, but they lost it soon after.

It's Unique Performance and they somehow have the rights by Ford to issue a new VIN #

I guess Ford has a little more pull with the DMV than old Boyd!
Click to expand...

Jay, when I posted that last time; I was quite blatantly trolling (hence the at the bottom of the post). However, I'm really about this one. A 60's vintage pony is torn down, repaired; one side or the other of 50% of the basic frame/chassis/unibody may be replaced; a 2000's vintage VIN is slapped on the nearly 40-year-old chassis/frame/unibody (or whatever is left of it); and it's represented as a 39-year-old car (even if it's only 38 - as in a '68 FB badged as a '67GT500E). And, with all of the assembly (manufacturing) taking place in the 2000's era, it's only subject to 67's emissions and safety regs - and it's being assembled and marketed by a for-profit commercial entity????
There are easily five times enough lawyers existant in the world today to give me pause at the thought of dreaming about purchasing one of these cars with the inherent liabilities.
Am I the only paranoid around here! (Shaddup, Fuzzy!)

EDIT: Don't get me wrong ; I'm still moving beyond the "Dreamin' " stages in grabbing the lonely old '67 coupe around-the-block; installing a sweet little Windsor with 5.0 MAF EFI, contemporary suspension, steering, brakes and creature comforts..... But it's not for-profit; it's for myself. Nobody is going to be responsible for it, only me.
 

65stanger

big blue fuzzy closet monster
Founding Member
Oct 25, 2001
3,885
1
58
In the Deepest, Darkest, corner of THE CLOSET, whe
Aug 4, 2005
#18
  • Aug 4, 2005
  • #18
StangDreamin' said:
Am I the only paranoid around here! (Shaddup, Fuzzy!)
Click to expand...
 

StangDreamin'

Founding Member
Aug 10, 2002
583
0
16
2nd Ocotillo bush east of the Colorado River; Sout
Aug 5, 2005
#19
  • Aug 5, 2005
  • #19
How did I know?
 

pabear89

Active Member
Apr 15, 2003
2,126
0
46
High in the Hills of So Ca with the Voices in My H
Aug 5, 2005
#20
  • Aug 5, 2005
  • #20
Good Question.............but the the voices tell me stuff too.

But I wonder if it would make it thru the offset frontal crash testing.
even lacking the airbag systems.

I bet theres a lawyer clause in the purchase contract somewhere.

 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

My Contribution
  • CarMichael Angelo
  • Apr 29, 2015
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
14
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 30, 2015
jetmech807
Hopefully buying a '13 this week, have some questions
  • RWDtech
  • Mar 31, 2013
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
29
Views
4K
2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk- Aug 8, 2013
RWDtech
Year Around Ford Mustang action via iRacing
  • MRaburn
  • Mar 19, 2013
  • StangNet Site News
Replies
0
Views
4K
StangNet Site News Mar 19, 2013
MRaburn
Feb 3 & 4 CentexSVT/Shelby/Ford event
  • sportscars
  • Dec 17, 2011
  • Regional Forums and Event Information
Replies
0
Views
814
Regional Forums and Event Information Dec 17, 2011
sportscars
The Thundercolt
  • CarMichael Angelo
  • Nov 19, 2011
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
35
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 21, 2017
RaggedGT
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?