The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Oh man, the fat is in the fire now...where's my extinguisher???

Funny how the number of frames produced as #0900 has been magically reduced......from three to two (plus one) which is closer to the ONE Enzo approved.....(still three, even using the OLD math that I use)

How could Mr. Piper's credibility be questioned? LOL!

D@mn the torpedoes, full speed ahead, Mr. G.!

 

An English car dealer shading the truth? Incredible.

 

Of course, the document doesn't really tell us anything. The document only states that David Piper at one time in history bought some stuff from mr Ferrari, which seems to be enough to bring one of the original factory P4's back to life. It however doesn't have any linkage to the car discussed in this thread and thus at its own merit bears no legal usage whatsoever. Not until it gets proven that the document is referring to the car which is in Napolis' possesion.

Having said that: I am in no way an expert on P4's and I have absolutly no reason to believe that Napolis' car is not the car that it allegedly is.

 

Read the threads and you will find that there is indeed "linkage" between Jim's car and Piper car 003.

 

i recieved the PM from P4replica also. i did not reply to it, nor did i feel it was important enough to bother Rob or Napolis. he ( p4 replica) seems pissed off that i agreed and posted to this thread in support of "THE CAR". I am sure Napolis has things under control. but i will help in any way i can if so asked. thanks to James for putting up with all this crap and sharing so much with us. i have a 308 sitting in my garage by his example. i cannot fathom why p4replica is so hell bent on discrediting James and "the car". the fact that he has a kit car makes his case worse for him, since it appears he is nothing more than a frustrated little man lashing out. pity since he seems to have a knowledge and genuine passion for the marque. 0846 or not , what matters is that Napolis is who he is and shares so much. i believe Napolis was part of Chrysler when it owned Gulfstream . seems a few folks still around here are familiar with his name. now i feel bad that i did not " say " something about bieng PMed in such a way.

 

Badly as its very unlikely to be allowed as either primary or suplimentary evidence. in the UK to allow a recorded phone conversation as evidence you have to play back the whole message including the disclaimer at the start notifying the person on the other end why the call is being recorded, and thats if both parties accept that the call is genuine. As the car was sold to James by David Piper in the UK and the reciept is on Bromcourt Ltd headed paper David Piper would thereby fall foul of a whole host of laws and trading standards regs not to mention the civil liabilities. I therefore doubt very much that a. David Piper had the conversation at all and b. it was recorded (by all accounts Mr Piper is neither stupid nor dishonest)

 

FYI:

If such a tape exists, it would absolutley be admissible in the US to prove that somebody here is lying. Either to prove a certain person is spreading false information, or that somebody committed fraud.

And the destruction of such a tape would be considered spoliation.

Don't say you were not warned.

 

So Piper bought the parts with the apperant intention to bring 0846 back to life. First of all, Pipers statement is one sided. It would be nice to get hold of some factory documents in which the factory acknowledges that they indeed sold those specific parts to mr Piper. Secondly, the question remains whether or not mr Piper actually delivered the goods that Napolis agreed to buy and Piper apperantly agreed to sell. Two stories emerge, namely that mr Piper did sell and deliver the 003/0846 bits as mentioned in the statement, and that he didn´t and instead sold and delivered a kit.

Mr Piper only stated that he bought 0846-parts from the factory, but I´ve seen no document that is conclusive proof that mr Piper has sold those specific parts to Napolis, or even had the intention to do so.

The email about swapping the Allegreti-body for some other body puzzles me. If that were the case, Napolis didn´t get the goods delivered he was entitled to, which means mr Piper fell short of his contractuel obligations. Whether or not there foul play is at hand, is of no consequence. If mr Piper obligated himself to deliver specific goods, he must act accordingly.

There´s only one member on this board that has first hand knowledge as to what Mr Piper and Napolis have agreed upon and that is Napolis. Mr Piper remains silent. According to Napolis´ remarks, he has agreed with mr Piper that mr Piper sells and delivers the parts named in the beforementioned statement, which seem to point at the original remains of 0846 (allthough factory confirmation is not at hand, at least not that I know of). If Napolis feels he has no reason to even suspect he did not get what he bought, than why should any of us?

I´ve read the arguments of those who believe Napolis does not own 0846, but those tend to be pointed at the details in which the remains of 0846 are built up to an actual car again. But that would be besides the point. If the chassis is substantial 0846 and the body is correct, than the car is fundamentally 0846. Gearboxes and engines can be replaced, but they don´t take away from the cars identity.

Of course the car would be ´more´ authentic with original engine and gearbox, but without you can only say it is 0846 BUT with something other than the original gearbox or engine. You can not say it stops being 0846 alltogether. The car would be devalued without its orginal engine and gearbox, for orginality seems to be the benchmark for its selling price, but orginality is NOT the same as authenticity.

A car can be be more or less original, but a car is or is not authentic. A cars originality is a sum of the original parts as opposed to the non-original parts. A cars authenticity is determined upon its fundamental base, i.e. it´s chassis. And then a car can lack a degree of originality but still be authentic.

Even though the engines determines the name of the car (when talk about Ferrari´s), it´s legal identity is down to it´s chassis and the factories administration of that chassis.

 

John thats the difference between US and UK law.

 

Good call on the ban, Rob.

I always enjoy a good thread on 0846.

 

I'm sure their will be more new users with smartarse usernames like TheRealMcCoy just waiting to reply

 

She runs and with open headers she is something to hear.

 

Fantastic news, any chance of posting a recording?

BTW I've been meaning to ask what you do with the suspension to run it on the street, soften it up all around, or run it in masochist mode?

 

This whole flame war is rather sad. For months, Jim freely posted pics here so the rest of us could follow along the creation of what I believe to be a work of art. Of course, given the recent turn of events, Jim quite naturally has been reluctant to do so. Even worse, I fear that others in Jim's shoes will take this whole experience as proof positive that it is a mistake to open the doors to the rabble mob. Too bad. There's nothing that can be done about it. It is just really too bad.

Dr "Keep the faith" Tax

 

Correct. In fact the document that Jim kindly exhibited in post #81 is totally irrelevant and proves absolutely nothing. The document is not a bill of sale, but is clearly headed CERTIFICATE OF ORIGIN.

A Certificate of Origin (COO) is a legal document that is sometimes required by Customs, but only in certain circumstances, when shipping certain restricted goods between certain countries, or where trade agreements for a particular commodity are non-extant. I do not believe there are currently any trade restrictions in force on shipping automobiles (either new or vintage) between UK and USA.

If a COO were required to import certain goods, it would accompany the goods and the Bills of Lading (Commercial Invoices) through Customs. Therefore, were this a genuine COO, not only would it have carried the Customs tariff classification code, which appears to be missing, but it would of course, on issue, have had to be authenticated and stamped by the nearest issuing Chamber of Commerce – in David Piper’s case, Guildford. Also, on arrival in USA it would have been stamped by US Customs at the port of entry. There do not appear to be any stamps on Jim’s document, so it is effectively worthless as a COO.

No. What, I suspect we are being shown here, is a document that was kindly provided by David Piper, and worded as such - at Jim’s behest, purely to assist Jim in registering the car for road use, as a 1967 Ferrari P4, with the New York licensing authorities – and hence the sub-heading “TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN”. Otherwise, were Jim to try and register the car as it’s true date of manufacture, i.e. the late 1970’s, with a very limited original content, he would have to meet all kind of nasty emissions requirements.

Were David to find out how this document was now being flaunted, I’m sure he would regret ever having signed it.

As I have demonstrated above, the document previously exhibited by Jim is neither a receipt nor an invoice, and is therefore NO PROOF of how the car was represented and sold to Jim.

However, as the car was exported from the UK by David Piper, it may very possibly have been shipped on a Bromcount Ltd. headed Commercial Invoice (CI). It would be VERY interesting to see a copy of the CI that was used to import this car into the USA. Does it also describe the car as a “1967 Ferrari 330 P4” on the CI, Jim?
Or does it say “Kit Car Special”? Surely Not, Jim?
It might also be interesting to see the value declared “For Customs Purposes Only” on that CI.

In view of the sum that Jim allegedly paid David Piper for this car (£500,000 Sterling) I suspect that the real Bill of Sale would have actually been invoiced by a certain other Geneva-based company owned David Piper, rather than Bromcount Ltd.

Am I correct Jim? Is there any possibility that we could have sight of these other two documents, so as to totally dispel any doubts as to how the car was actually represented and sold to you by David? Please.

 

In reference to the possibility of the existence of, and the legal stature of an alleged tape recording of a telephone conversation that took place on the evening of July 6th 2004, between David Piper (hereinafter referred to as DP) and David Williams (hereinafter referred to as DW)

It is interesting to note the differing legal standpoints between the UK and USA. Fortunately, the alleged tape recording is safely extant in the UK, unless of course, due to popular demand, it subsequently becomes available for general consumption, or is extradited by subpoena to the USA, both of which I somehow doubt.

No, apart from its potential legal implications, for now, it serves far better use as an aide memoire. I had another call from DW this evening, reference his phone conversation with DP. The more he goes over it, the more he has begun to realise that certain statements made by DP, and the phraseology DP uses are very similar to those used by Max Wakefield in that infamous leaked email to Paul Skett. For instance, compare “This chap is just a dreamer” with “He’s a dreamer”. Could it be that the words in that email came straight from DP’s mouth?

He also recalled something else that DP had said. It transpires that he (DW) was only the second person to phone him to ask him about the P4 that he had sold to Jim. Apparently, the only other person who regularly talks to DP, about it, is Max Wakefield, who keeps him updated about the various developments in postings on FerrariChat. Now, bearing in mind all the interest that is shown in this car, don’t you think that’s strange? – particularly as DP seems to love to talk to people about these cars that he has spent half his lifetime working on.

Even odder, DP also allegedly stated that he hasn’t heard from Jim G. in years. Apparently the last time Jim phoned DP was about two weeks after the car was first landed in the USA. This call was simply to ask DP if he could supply some longer-eared 3-prong K/O’s, as the car had been fitted with the wrong style. Now don’t you think it’s very strange, that bearing in mind all the discoveries that Jim has made since 24th October 2002, and that the car that DP allegedly sold to Jim as a “kit-car special” was actually the missing P3/4 #0846, that Jim has never once thought to phone DP to share these amazing discoveries with him?

That telephone conversation most definitely did take place. I suggest that as you appear to have an interest in this matter, and seeing as you are also resident in the UK, if you have any doubts as to whether it actually took place or not, that you give DP a call, and ask him yourself. I’m sure DP would be equally delighted to tell you ALL about Jim’s P4, just as he was to DW.

One thing we appear to agree on, and that is: David Piper is most definitely neither stupid NOR dishonest. Nor is he a “dreamer” either!

 

Jim, she looks awesome, and must sound great. Thanks for signing my magazine too with your MKIV on the cover, means a lot and I appreciate it! Think you'll be coming out to Arizona in your escapade to Monterey? Would love to hear your beast! Thanks, Patrick.

 

HERE is a good example of what happens when another valuable automobile of potentially questionable provenance is discussed on this forum. A little over a week ago, ‘Attitude928’ posted some photographs of a long-nose Jaguar ‘D’ type belonging to the owner of Coventry Imports in Bridgewater, NJ.

In one photograph a chassis tag XKD 574 can clearly be seen. The owner of the car did not post these photographs, nor did he himself make any specific claims for the car on this forum. Nor, was he given the opportunity to defend it.

Despite the fact that this car, at least appears to have the correct original engine from XKD 574, in a mere 23 postings over two days, the car is rounded on by so-called experts (or was it perchance the aforementioned “rabble mob”?) and variously dismissed as “a bitsa”; “a cheap Rembrandt copy”; “a replica”; “a partial replication” and “a Lynx or similar reconstruction”. In fact, just within a hair’s breadth of actually calling the car a ‘fake’.

However, there are some obvious double standards which are employed and rigidly enforced on this forum when it comes to any discussions of Jim’s P4. Despite the fact that David Piper allegedly sold this car to Jim as a “Kit-Car Special”, Jim has claimed, on several occasions, that his car is the missing Ferrari P3/4 #0846 (which also, if it was not completely destroyed, certainly suffered from severe fire damage). Using some perverse logic, it would appear that simply because Jim says it is, and the obvious fact that it is also a highly desireable and undeniably beautiful Ferrari race car - ergo this MUST be true.

Should not the credit for the “creation of this work of art” really be attributed to the Old Master (David Piper) who originally built her in the first place? Or, to continue using analogies from the art world, isn’t what we are now seeing tantamount to the transformation of a work of art into a forgery?

 

Oh, great - another one.

'Napolis is a straight shooter. By way of unimpeachable example, he was more than willing to bump his GT40 down from first to fourth in broad daylight for all the world to see, rather than pull the wool over anyone's eyes.

See, the car he bought was represented as J5, which prior to his detective/forensics work, was taken as fact by absolutely every authority, bar none as being J5, the winner of '67 LeMans. Turned out it was J6, the 4th place finisher. Nobody, but nobody knew that until 'Napolis figured it out. I'll bet he sleeps damn good at night.

The moral grandeur of independent integrity is the sublimest thing in nature. - Buckminster.

Old site:
Scroll down to 'Napolis's comments Posted on Sunday, July 27, 2003 - 5:09 pm:

That's just a hint.

Amscray, haters.

 

Well said in a short posting Wax. The thing I find so interesting about those ascribing evil intentions to Mr. Glickenhaus is the well known fact that he graciously and publicly took the hit with his MkIV. Why would he suddenly behave differently with the Ferrari?

 

<Heavy Sigh>

Mr. Cognoscenti, in the words of the late great President Reagan, "There you go again." You obviously have a axe to grind, which is your right. Why you choose this forum to grind it, beats me. I personally don't see myself as a "defender" of Jim Glickenhaus. Jim doesn't need my help. I do think that some of Jim's detractors have, in the heat of passion, stepped over the line, but that's their problem.

But again, none of this debate really matters to me. Nor does it matter, I suspect, to the majority of the members of this forum, which explains why I'm puzzled that you are arguing your case here. I don't give a rat's behind whether this car is number 0846 or number 007. But I have very much enjoyed watching the progress of its reconstruction. You see, this is a car guy place. We love cars, and all of Jim's cars are really cool cars. I would love to be the janitor at his place just to look at and hear the cars.

Sadly, this whole affair has taken a very mean turn. Given all the venom that has been spit, a lessor person than Jim would just lock his car up and say "Chuck You" to the rest of us. I'm hoping that this doesn't happen. But I have to tell you that if it were me, this is probably what I would do.

So my suggestion to you is take your case to someone or some group who really gives a squat. I'd much rather return to ogling the pics that Jim has so kindly made available to the world.

Somehow, though, I don't think that you are going to take my advice.

With regrets, Dale

 

I noticed that you registered just recently. Your posting is remarkably similar to Paul Skett's, same format and wording. Is it possible that you are Paul posting on someome else's computer and your 1 month ban is more than you can stand? Or are you one of Pauls cronies typing out what he sends you. I could be way off base here but the similarities between the both of you are remarkable.
Just my own observation mind you.

 

I think Wax has a great post. Furthermore, if you don't believe/agree what Mr. G is saying, then don't enter/respond/read any of this post. Just ignore it. You've all made your point of view known. Just don't read the post. I enjoy Mr. G's pictures,stories, anecdotes and this car is amazing and I'm happy to "witness" it. Anyone out there that get his panties in a twist, just stop reading the post. Or are you deriving some guilty pleasure out of it and forcibly pushing your opinion on other people.

 

Dear Dale,
thanks a lot for this great write up!
You express exactly my feelings. This all here distressed me deeply.
Thats why I have posted (a few weeks ago)
http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=67333502&postcount=1
Wolfgang