ClassicOldsmobile.com  

Go Back   ClassicOldsmobile.com > Classifieds > Oldsmobile Cars > Cars For Sale
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Search

Welcome to Classic Oldsmobile Forum!
Welcome to Classic Oldsmobile forum,

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to start new topics, reply to conversations, privately message other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join Classic Oldsmobile Forum today!


Reply
 
 
 
submit to reddit
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old December 23rd, 2008, 06:25 PM   #1
Trying to remember member
 
wmachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,109
1966 442 convertible E-Bay FRAUD

Ebay item number 140290295161
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...3AIT&viewitem=
Well here, guys, is one of the main reasons why it is not good that our cars are worth a lot of money. Greed breeds fraud. And fraud like this "pollutes the gene pool" of our cars. Yes, it is a 442 convertible, and yes it is a 4-speed. But someone wasn't satisfied to stop there. They had to resort to forgery to further "enhance" (you can read this as alter for more money) this car. I know this particular car beyond a shadow of a doubt. Take a look at the body tag. Looks good, huh? Its a reproduction. Has the same Lansing body sequence number as the original tag. Now the tag has an R-2 paint code. Yes, the car has been Target Red for many years now. But the original body tag is J-2 Frost Mist (green). and that's just for starters. I have many pictures of this car including the original body tag with the same body number. And a lot of pics of what numbers *don't* match!
No, it is *not* numbers matching and this fraudulent attempt has been exposed.
I'll say it again, there is only one reason to alter the numbers on a car: FRAUD. And here it is in all of its glory. I don't know who the seller is, I don't know who added the reproduction tag. All I know is that it has been changed recently. It is not illegal to change the body tag. But it *is* illegal and immoral to misrepresent the car with it. E-bay won't let anyone know who the buyer is, but it will surface, and when the buyer finds out (and is given proof) the car not as presented, he'll have a good legal case against the seller.
So take a good look at what is happening to our cars. I'm disgusted by this mutilation and deception.
wmachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 23rd, 2008, 07:44 PM   #2
Registered User
 
Eric Anderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: North East PA
Posts: 713
Like a 4 spd. 442 is so undesirable you'd have to fudge the numbers, what a jacka**, did you report this clown to e-bay? That would suck to lay out a bunch of cash for a car and end up laying out a buch more for legal fees.
__________________
he who has the most toys when he dies...wins
Eric Anderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24th, 2008, 04:39 AM   #3
Trying to remember member
 
wmachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,109
Well Eric, that just goes to show you the extent of the greed.
It won't do any good to report it to E-bay. Think about it, E-bay can't be the judge and jury in these cases. How would they know what the facts, or who's right, and who's just trying to slander. No different than an ad in the newspaper. Buyer beware at that level.
Too bad Olds isn't like Pontiac with the PHS (Pontiac Historical Society). They have invoice records, so this kind of forgery won't fly.
But these disrespectful lowlifes think they're pretty clever, and they don't know there are people out there keeping track of some of these cars, and are ready to blow the whistle on them.
wmachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24th, 2008, 10:49 AM   #4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,771
I can tell the body plate is not original. It took no careful inspection to see that it is a forgery. 3x2 were available with C60 although the seller says they weren't. 3x2 just required a 442 with manual trans, 3 or 4 speed. The copper fuel pipes on the Tri Carbs are reproduction. The seller wants a lot for a car with such a crusty underside and frame. Also, what does he mean by "numbers matching?" That is a popular thing to say, but pre-68 Olds didn't have the level of numbers matching that most buyers assume. No VIN on the engine, etc.

Last edited by Run to Rund; December 24th, 2008 at 10:56 AM.
Run to Rund is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24th, 2008, 11:26 AM   #5
"me somebody" site member
 
aliensatemybuick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,392
This is the car I have previously been accused ad nauseum of selling with a bad motor on another forum. Here is the cowl tag from the days I owned the car (sold it in early 2006):

Click the image to open in full size.

Note no "K" to indicate A/C...I am of the belief that the A/C was dealer added, based on info. provided to me by Curt A. I'm no cowl tag expert, but my recollection as well (I learned after I sold the car) was that it indicated a parchment interior.

Attached for the heckuvit is the detailed description I sent to interested partes back when I was selling the car:

>>>----- Original Message ----- From: "scott fettner"
>>><scottfettner@hotmail.com>
>>>To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX@hotmail.com>
>>>Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 6:50 PM
>>>Subject: 1966 442
>>>
>>>
>>>>Mike,
>>>>
>>>>Nice talking with you before. Here is a link to some detailed photos on
>>>>my 442:
>>>>
>>>>xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>>I've also appended below a detailed description of the car. It is what
>>>>it is...a pretty nice looking car, but not really a "show car". A high
>>>>end driver is how I would describe it. As I said on the phone, I'm not a
>>>>"big dog" in the hobby...its as nice a car as I will ever own, I am sure.
>>>> And when it came to things like the fuel bowl, woodgrain wheel, and
>>>>some other things (like NOS front and rear bumpers and some expensive
>>>>trim parts) I've put on the car, I ponied up the cash because I thought
>>>>the car was worth it. As you will read (and see) below, the hood lip
>>>>chrome is the worst trim part on the car, and the tach doesn't
>>>>work...these two pieces were sold to me by disreputable Olds vendors, and
>>>>I have left them that way as a reminder of how naiive I once was.
>>>>
>>>>I am happy to point out every flaw with my car, because despite its
>>>>flaws, I still think its a magnificent car. And if you don't think its
>>>>worth what I am asking for it, I am not at all offended. At least for now
>>>>(ie until a few weeks go by and I don't get any offers even close to what
>>>>I am asking) my price is going to be pretty firm. Truth is, it will pain
>>>>me to sell it. But i have some other "toys", and have decided to sell
>>>>this one to help with the down-payment on a vacation home.
>>>>
>>>>If I could keep the car, I would eventually replace the console and dash,
>>>>fix the tach, and replace the clutch and control arm bushings. And
>>>>perhaps get the AC working. These are things I just have never gotten
>>>>around to. The other flaws I would pretty much leave be.
>>>>
>>>>I will send another E-mail, actually forward to you an E-mail I recieved
>>>>the first time I tried to sell the car...it addresses the undercoating
>>>>issue, at least tangentally.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for listening,
>>>>
>>>>Scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>1966 Oldsmobile 442 convertible factory 4 speed car with AC and Tri-carb
>>>>setup added with attention paid towards correct details. This is a pretty
>>>>clean car. Not perfect, but very nice. Older top is in excellent
>>>>shape..back window is crystal clear. Body and paint are top notch. I
>>>>believe the car was originally green based on cowl tag code, however no
>>>>evidence of the original color remains.car was obviously completely
>>>>disassembled prior to painting. Jambs and bottom of trunk lid are nicely
>>>>done...only thing not done to my liking is the trunk, which has black
>>>>paint on the floor, inside the lower quarters and lower wheelhouses. No
>>>>rust in the trunk whatsoever, and no evidence of any bodywork that I can
>>>>see. The fender "vents" were also not painted properly (or at all...the
>>>>centers are bare). Bumpers are NOS. Stainless and diecast trim pieces
>>>>are very nice originals, with only the slightest "peppering" or "crazing"
>>>>on some of the pieces (front hood lip chrome, depicted in extreme
>>>>closeup, is the worst piece on the car by far). There are NO rechromed
>>>>parts on this car whatsoever. Repro parts include the chambered tail
>>>>pipes, "442" emblems, the side view mirror, air cleaner lids, tires
>>>>(redlines), some weatherstrips, taillight and backup light lenses, and
>>>>various underhood and trunk items (plug wires, mats, etc).
>>>>
>>>>To my knowledge, interior upholstery and carpet are original. All glass
>>>>is excellent. Windshield is new. Car has correct casting numbers on
>>>>engine, heads, exhaust manifolds, etc etc, and as far as I am aware, are
>>>>original. I have no protecto-plate or any other documentation on the car,
>>>>and without that, I cannot call it "matching numbers". I am also unsure
>>>>if the alternator, starter, water pump, etc. have matching date codes.
>>>>The radiator is a new 4 core "US Radiator" unit without transmission
>>>>cooling tanks. Appearance-wise, it is the closest to the original
>>>>available (when I bought the car, it did not have its original radiator
>>>>anyway).
>>>>
>>>>While the SS1s (including the spare) are the correct ones for this year,
>>>>I think the car originally came with hubcaps (based on "trunk clues").
>>>>The rims are nice, but do have some "peppering" of the chrome. Things
>>>>like the redline tires (later F70s), plug wires, belts, hoses, clamps,
>>>>battery, mufflers, exhaust hangers, spare tire cover, air cleaners,
>>>>headlights, voltage regulator, coil, radiator or gas tank caps, shift
>>>>ball, etc. are not "correct". Other incorrect items were by choice,
>>>>namely the custom-deluxe "woodgrain" steering wheel and AM/FM radio. I
>>>>also added the "police certified" speedometer (a rare find), re-setting
>>>>the odometer as close as possible to the exact mileage indicated on the
>>>>original speedometer when it failed. Mileage indicated is approximately
>>>>64K.mileage on the car when I bought it in 1999 was around 60K, and the
>>>>previous title (dated 1989) indicated the car had been driven around 1000
>>>>in the previous ten years
>>>>
>>>>The car is mechanically excellent, however the clutch chatters a bit off
>>>>the line unless "babied", and has for the 6 years I have owned it. Also,
>>>>the upper control arm bushings are worn. One tire has a flat spot, I
>>>>think, which causes a mild vibration at 65 MPH.which seems to disappear
>>>>at lower and higher speeds. Needless to say, the car handles terribly
>>>>with the bias ply tires. Both the vibration and overall handling were
>>>>much improved upon with a set of radials I borrowed form a friend as a
>>>>"test". Brakes are excellent (considering they are manual drums, anyway).
>>>>The AC does not blow cold, I beleive it did "somewhat" when I bought it -
>>>>at this point may need to be evacuated and recharged - I have little
>>>>occasion to use it anyway. The radio works fine. So does the power
>>>>antenna. The clock and tach do not. The backup lights also do not work.
>>>>The flarestat (flashers) do work.
>>>>
>>>>This car was undercoated, as far as I know, at the original selling
>>>>dealer. However there is not a SPECK of rust on the entire car. I have
>>>>owned it for 6 years, and I believe the paint job is now over 14 years
>>>>old. There are NO body work "breaks outs" anywhere on the car.
>>>>Underneath, the car is bone dry. As far as I know, this is basically a
>>>>well cared for mostly original car with a nice re-paint and new bumpers,
>>>>etc. It is far from perfect. The "chrome" on the dash has worn off. The
>>>>engine compartment is clean, but not so clean that brain surgery could be
>>>>performed within. The carpet is faded. The console has a crack at the
>>>>bottom rear, very typical of these cars. The stitching on a small
>>>>section of piping on the driver's side seat is worn. So is the stitching
>>>>on the edges of the sunvisors. There is a hairline crack on the upper
>>>>left of the dash. There is some "peppering" and "crazing" of the interior
>>>>chrome, such as the AC vents, sun visor and rear view mirror supports,
>>>>etc. There is the occasional paint chip, a small scratch or two, and the
>>>>car has two minor dings, one on the passenger fender, and one on the
>>>>driver's side quarter panel. The steering wheel has (very minor) cracks
>>>>at the spokes. There is a gap at the bottom rear-most corner of the
>>>>passenger door where it does not perfectly line up with the
>>>>quarter/rocker panel. Despite its flaws, it is still a beautiful car, and
>>>>one of the nicest of its kind I have seen.
>>>>
>>>>As far as the tri-carb setup goes, I believe it was dealer installed
>>>>either at the original selling dealer or shortly thereafter. However, I
>>>>cannot prove it. There is no "T" suffix on the head. The fuel bowl is
>>>>the correct one, however I added it to the car, which had rubber fuel
>>>>lines when I bought it. The carb tags (which I added) are numbered
>>>>properly, however they are date coded "A6", which is a bit earlier I
>>>>think than the May build date of the car. I believe the intake is date
>>>>coded a few weeks prior to the car itself. The primary throttle arm and
>>>>oil filler tube have been modified (re-bent, lengthened) to appear as the
>>>>correct tri-carb pieces. The throttle bellcrank when I bought the car was
>>>>the correct one, as was the fuel pump (AC service/replacement number).
>>>>The choke vacuum break is metal instead of white plastic, I think this
>>>>was also a service replacement. I do have the correct "stone" fuel filter
>>>>element, but choose to run a paper element instead.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Last edited by aliensatemybuick; December 24th, 2008 at 03:00 PM.
aliensatemybuick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24th, 2008, 01:18 PM   #6
Senior Moment
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 260
Is this the same car
Jokers69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24th, 2008, 01:44 PM   #7
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 122
No doubt this discussion will not show up on the other forum...

"Body and paint are top notch. I
believe the car was originally green based on cowl tag code, however no
evidence of the original color remains.car was obviously completely
disassembled prior to painting. Jambs and bottom of trunk lid are nicely
done"

Despite the cowl tag swap, this is the same car. Somebody post a reply from the seller, should be interesting...
Giftman23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2008, 06:41 PM   #8
"me somebody" site member
 
aliensatemybuick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,392
The seller of my old car has revised the Ebay auction description as of 09:09:45 PST today (Dec. 29th):

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...m=140290295161

I have got a lot of questions about the trim tag on this car so Im selling this car that is red now and dont know if it could have been a green car or not. I dont know if it as a factory a/c car but it does have a/c now. I do know that it is a true 442 and a factory 4-speed car.


Interesting that with less than 24 hrs to go in the auction, he is NOW unsure about the color change or A/C, but still KNOWS FOR SURE that it is a factory 4 speed 442. Gee, how can he be sure about that? If the tag was changed before he got the car, then presumably he was lied to by the guy who sold it to him (i.e. about the color being original). Or he just assumed that was the case based on the current cowl tag. Either way, how can he NOW be sure he wasn't lied to about it being a factory 4 speed 442? Because that is what the cowl tag says? The FAKE cowl tag that indicates that it WAS originally red when it couldn't possibly be?

There is a saying: "oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive." That's because once you start lying, you have to lie again to cover the first lie. Eventually, the inconsistencies add up and you are busted. I want to know how it is that he NOW doubts what the cowl tag says (and presumably the previous owner told him) about the color, but trusts both implicitly when it comes to it being a 442 and a 4 speed car at that.

*I* know it is a factory 4 speed 442 because I owned the car before the original cowl tag was changed. But as far as any future buyer is concerned, that car might as well have been an auto-on-the-column Cutlass. Which is why it was so incredibly stupid to change the cowl tag on an already very rare and exceptional car just to deny a color change.
_________________
aliensatemybuick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2009, 01:11 PM   #9
Registered User
 
kf442's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3
Cowl tag change

Good work man!

If you think about it who is to say the tag was not changed even before you got it. I really makes you think. My 67 has receipts dating back to the original owner so I am sure, but I am going to be very diligent on my next purchase. I did not realize it was so easy...

Thank you very much!!!

Ken
kf442 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2009, 02:25 PM   #10
"me somebody" site member
 
aliensatemybuick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,392
Well, I don't think the science (or is it art?) of cowl tag fakery was that advanced back in 1999 when *I* bought the car. Also, if someone WERE to have changed the tag, I'd expect it to have better matched the car's configuration (color, options) at the time I bought it. As I indicated in another thread on the subject, if asked about the car, I may have to state that it was a sh*t-brown peg-legged low-compression 2 bbl 330 / column shifted Jetaway equipped Cutlass when I owned it.

Last edited by aliensatemybuick; January 21st, 2009 at 02:27 PM.
aliensatemybuick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2009, 02:43 PM   #11
car guy
 
gearheads78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 5,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by kf442 View Post
Good work man!

If you think about it who is to say the tag was not changed even before you got it. I really makes you think. My 67 has receipts dating back to the original owner so I am sure, but I am going to be very diligent on my next purchase. I did not realize it was so easy...

Thank you very much!!!

Ken
Ken this is off topic but I'm sorry you are lot allowed to post one tiny pic of a car in your avatar. We much have good pics and details of the 67 or you will be reported to the mods Please comply by starting a new thread.

Thanks in advance for you help in this matter.
__________________
-Richard "If I only had the time, talent and money to build everything in my head....."

66 Cutlass built and gone to new owner
54' 2dr HT future badass






6-25-2010 RIP Chloe Rene Daddy loves you always
gearheads78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2009, 06:04 PM   #12
Trying to remember member
 
wmachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by kf442 View Post
Good work man!

If you think about it who is to say the tag was not changed even before you got it. I really makes you think. My 67 has receipts dating back to the original owner so I am sure, but I am going to be very diligent on my next purchase. I did not realize it was so easy...

Thank you very much!!!

Ken
Ken, if that makes you think, keep thinking: You have receipts, and receipts can be (and are) forged! Yes, it is that bad. If you really want to see how bad it is, jump into the "documented Corvettes" cesspool where there is some real money to be made. Experts in the know even say there are more big block Corvettes on the road now than came out of the factory.

And Richard is correct, you need to let us closer to that fine '67. Or you will be reported!!
wmachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2009, 04:59 AM   #13
Administrator
 
Oldsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Red Oak Texas
Posts: 8,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmachine View Post
...And Richard is correct, you need to let us closer to that fine '67. Or you will be reported!!
Post some pictures in the photo gallery section at least, then just give us a link. That one little picture is a tease!
__________________
Dan

"The rocket 455.....it's a sledgehammer approach to a thumbtack world" LuxBlue of HAMB.
Oldsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2009, 04:59 AM
ClassicOldsmobile
1957 Oldsmobile




Paid Advertisement
 
 
 
submit to reddit
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A/C in a 1966 98 convertible bigoldscruiser Ninety-Eight 22 May 1st, 2009 04:51 PM
1966 Olds 98 convertible whosyourdaddy Ninety-Eight 8 October 27th, 2008 09:50 AM
1966 olds 98 convertible bigsexy4279 Cars For Sale 1 January 7th, 2008 06:31 PM
My 1966 convertible The Pope Chassis/Body/Frame 2 July 4th, 2007 08:29 AM
Fraud alert! Do not buy cars from these guys. fnfship Other 1 March 11th, 2005 09:12 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:30 PM.


Advertising - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Jobs
All content Copyright 2008 by Internet Brands, Inc.