Bonhams in the do-do?
Discussion
theadman said:
marshalla said:
williamp said:
According to that, the car is in a container, in southampton.. so a shipping container at the port. £10mil worth. Anyone fancy having a look?
Since June 2014 ? I suspect it won't be looking fully restored any more.v8250 said:
..
This case/dispute has been known for some years now, though the Bonhams association and potential loss could be interesting.
http://www.gatsbyonline.com/main.aspx?page=text&am...
You cannot libel the dead, and Mr Swaters is dead, but that link seems pretty unfair and scurrilous about him. The Judge thought it likely that Mr Swaters was an honest man, and heard from his (still living) business partner, whom the Judge found to be a man of integrity.This case/dispute has been known for some years now, though the Bonhams association and potential loss could be interesting.
http://www.gatsbyonline.com/main.aspx?page=text&am...
Breadvan72 said:
You cannot libel the dead, and Mr Swaters is dead, but that link seems pretty unfair and scurrilous about him. The Judge thought it likely that Mr Swaters was an honest man, and heard from his (still living) business partner, whom the Judge found to be a man of integrity.
Very true, but the article is only written from the perspective of the author...it was posted to show that the news is not new news. Where the Judge described Jaques Swaters as an honest man, which I have no doubt he was, there's always that little issue of money to be made from rebuilding a lost/semi-lost historic sports car and the large motivational sums involved...similar to the Old #1 Bentley and the more recent Brewer v Stanley Mann cases, both of which were highly publicized. Of more interest is that of Bonham's position in selling a car with a theoretical known dispute, or at least a sale where a dispute could arise. One would hope Bonham's would have got the all clear from their legal team...but it's not the first time an auction house has found themselves in a difficult position post sale. We should look forward to closure of this case...and look forward to the next episode of scurrilous auction house activities...they are, after all, but second hand car sales men in suits of a better cut cloth 
A profit motive is not in itself an unworthy thing. I try to be ethical and honest in my work, but I work for money.
I agree, however, with your general observation about auctioneers and dealers and would extend the observation to many of those selling high end goods such as rare cars, fine art, yachts etc. In my experience they are often, despite their good tailoring and apparently clean fingernails, those who nowadays would not be allowed to work in the City because of the regulatory regime, and that is saying something. Pecunia non olet*, it is said; only sometimes, it does.
* "Money has no smell". Reportedly said by the Emperor Vespasian to his son and successor Titus who was complaining about a tax on the collection of urine by tanners from public urinals.
I agree, however, with your general observation about auctioneers and dealers and would extend the observation to many of those selling high end goods such as rare cars, fine art, yachts etc. In my experience they are often, despite their good tailoring and apparently clean fingernails, those who nowadays would not be allowed to work in the City because of the regulatory regime, and that is saying something. Pecunia non olet*, it is said; only sometimes, it does.
* "Money has no smell". Reportedly said by the Emperor Vespasian to his son and successor Titus who was complaining about a tax on the collection of urine by tanners from public urinals.
Breadvan72 said:
You cannot libel the dead, and Mr Swaters is dead, but that link seems pretty unfair and scurrilous about him. The Judge thought it likely that Mr Swaters was an honest man, and heard from his (still living) business partner, whom the Judge found to be a man of integrity.
Not professing to be an expert but going off that Gatsby site there were only 5 of those cars made. Swaters, Ferrari dealer, expert and friend of Enzo Ferrari, bought one without realising it was stolen? Really? Then there were some shenanigans with chassis number changes, just sounds dodgy.Hard to care too much, it's only one extremely rich person suing another extremely rich person.
If I ever win the euromillions there is no way I would be buying anything like this, £10M for a reconditioned chassis and all new everything else, it's hardly an original. I'd much prefer a replica like the one on petrolicious, the 1959 Ferrari 250 TR, amazing but still cheap enough to drive all the time.
Why not go from the judgment, which is based on evidence, rather than from some comments on a wingnut website? There were no shenanigans with chassis numbers.
That's the problem with internet tittle tattle. Someone writes something on an obscure website, and it gets repeated as though it were an established fact.
The Judge, meanwhile, said this:
56: What emerges from those articles is that, at the time of the sales contract, there was considerable confusion, even among the specialists, as to what the chassis numbers were of the 375 Pluses, whether 0384AM and 0394AM was the same car, which 375 Plus had won which race and which 375 Pluses had survived into the 1980s. This provides an illuminating background to two allegations made by Ms Lawson and/or Mr Ford, that the sale to Mr Swaters and Mr Lancksweert at a price equivalent to about U.S. $100,000 was at a substantial undervalue and that Mr Swaters concealed the true identity of the Car by describing it as 0394AM.
...
58. Despite Mr Ford's assertion in his submissions that Mr Swaters was aware, at the time of the purchase in March 1990 and thereafter, that the wreck was definitely that of 0384AM and that he then deliberately concealed its true identity by describing it as 0394AM, the contemporaneous correspondence belies that suggestion
That's the problem with internet tittle tattle. Someone writes something on an obscure website, and it gets repeated as though it were an established fact.
The Judge, meanwhile, said this:
56: What emerges from those articles is that, at the time of the sales contract, there was considerable confusion, even among the specialists, as to what the chassis numbers were of the 375 Pluses, whether 0384AM and 0394AM was the same car, which 375 Plus had won which race and which 375 Pluses had survived into the 1980s. This provides an illuminating background to two allegations made by Ms Lawson and/or Mr Ford, that the sale to Mr Swaters and Mr Lancksweert at a price equivalent to about U.S. $100,000 was at a substantial undervalue and that Mr Swaters concealed the true identity of the Car by describing it as 0394AM.
...
58. Despite Mr Ford's assertion in his submissions that Mr Swaters was aware, at the time of the purchase in March 1990 and thereafter, that the wreck was definitely that of 0384AM and that he then deliberately concealed its true identity by describing it as 0394AM, the contemporaneous correspondence belies that suggestion
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 12th November 11:04
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 12th November 11:06
Breadvan72 said:
Pecunia non olet*, it is said; only sometimes, it does. * "Money has no smell". Reportedly said by the Emperor Vespasian to his son and successor Titus who was complaining about a tax on the collection of urine by tanners from public urinals.
Nicely put and haven't heard/read this idiom in many a year. You've reminded me of my old history master, he was an enthusiastic old duffer with immensely greasy jet black hair who drove an early and very battered 1970's Datsun Station Wagon with plastic 'wood' covering to the sides. I remember him explaining the Vespasian link to the generic name of French public urinals, 'les vespasiennes'. He also theorized 'pecunia non olet' to the modern day narrative, 'every man has his price', saying that people of today are unable to smell as well as the Romans; as innocent boys it took us some time to register what he meant. Breadvan72 said:
.... In my experience they are often, despite their good tailoring and apparently clean fingernails, those who nowadays would not be allowed to work in the City because of the regulatory regime, and that is saying something. Pecunia non olet*, it is said; only sometimes, it does.
.
Mild personal amusement at this having gone from employment at Brooks (Bonham's previous incarnation) to regulated financial services. I face greater wariness from the public in my current guise, but my experience would certainly accord with your sentiments!.
The auction world is distinctly er... characterful, that's for sure, whether at the £50 banger end or the sort of sale where £50 only gets you the catalogue. Still amazes me, one wouldn't trade a few £100k of bricks and mortar the way cars of the same value are punted around.
A dramatic and interesting tale surrounding the Ferrari
Perhaps Bonhams were the claimant as they wanted a decision from the court to put to bed who owned the car once and for all. But that is speculation on my part.
I guess it could get messier if the US parties take some more steps in the US which is presumably where the buyer is based. But they don't come out well in the judgement.
Perhaps Bonhams were the claimant as they wanted a decision from the court to put to bed who owned the car once and for all. But that is speculation on my part.
I guess it could get messier if the US parties take some more steps in the US which is presumably where the buyer is based. But they don't come out well in the judgement.
lowdrag said:
Just type Jaguar XKD 604 into your browser and check out the way the story is taken apart by Jaguar magazine. RM Sotheby's are talking up to $7 million for a completely fake car.
Amusing posting. 
But when I Google for Jaguar XKD604 the first link I get is
http://www.coventryracers.com/cars/detail/?car=XKD...
Which is listed in the main 604 thread. This page mentions the name of dear old Norman, one of the most enjoyable people to send time with and certainly great fun to listen too. And certainly up until a couple of years ago a better wheel man than I'll ever dream of being. Anyway this evening I thought I should have a quick look at what his book has to say on the subject of 604, well nothing, but amusingly he details 603 as being the De Dion car, reminding us that memory can be fallible.
I assume the link you want us to find was
https://www.facebook.com/jaguarmagazine/posts/9121...
lowdrag said:
The index of Norman's book doesn't even mention 604 Ken. Not one bloody word, and what he say's about 603 having the De Dion rear end I am sure isn't correct. I don't think it did.
I know. That is what I was saying. 604 had the De Dion rear end and 603 was driven by Mike Hawthorn in the fateful race. Norman has got the 2 mixed up. The reason I had mentioned it was that the Coventry race cars page quotes Norman as part of its claims about 604.
Memories are fallible.
The book saying it was written off and dismantled on such and such date was based on the actual documents.
In Norman's book he quotes from his test notes about the tests he made on 603 shortly before the race.
lowdrag said:
Just type Jaguar XKD 604 into your browser and check out the way the story is taken apart by Jaguar magazine. RM Sotheby's are talking up to $7 million for a completely fake car.
Jaguar Magazine and Les Hughes have since been proven to be in error on the points made in that Jaguar Magazine Facebook article regarding XKD604. The article has since been pulled from the Jaguar Magazine web site.Strange that. Can you then explain why the article "pulled" is still there?
https://www.facebook.com/jaguarmagazine/posts/9121...
I had an email today from confirming they stand by their version of the history of this car, as so do I. Put up or shut up Greg. If the JDHT will accept it as the genuine article I'll eat my hat, just like 505. I don't think you have mentioned what happened to the original body and who made the new one?
I await with bated breath the description of the car by RMSotheby's. Probably written in Narnian I expect. There are no straws left to clutch I fear. Be interesting to see you there at the auction - and to speak my piece.
https://www.facebook.com/jaguarmagazine/posts/9121...
I had an email today from confirming they stand by their version of the history of this car, as so do I. Put up or shut up Greg. If the JDHT will accept it as the genuine article I'll eat my hat, just like 505. I don't think you have mentioned what happened to the original body and who made the new one?
I await with bated breath the description of the car by RMSotheby's. Probably written in Narnian I expect. There are no straws left to clutch I fear. Be interesting to see you there at the auction - and to speak my piece.
All I can say to you is go to the Jaguar Magazine Facebook website and scroll down through the articles, go back to August if you would like, no article on XKD604 can be found because it is not there anymore. If they in fact stand by their article they are guilty of irresponsible journalism, a sad state of affairs but prevalent in this "internet society. The representation that XKD604 never had a de Dion rear suspension is one glaring example. I could go through the other errors one by one in that article but I would suggest you wait with your "bated breath" and look for the RM catalogue description on XKD604 when it comes out shortly.
I am continually surprised at how you have hounded 604 over the years with your personal opinion which is based on nothing but whimsical fantasy. You have never seen the car, you know no one that has seen the car, and that includes Less Hughes of Jaguar Magazine sequestered in Australia, and you have never reviewed any of the evidentiary documentation that has been researched on the car and it's components. Frankly you just don't know what you are talking about but you seem to do a lot of talking expecting that to help your opinion. The world experts in D-Type cars have evaluated XKD604 and presented their findings which will be released in the RM catalogue description.
Your statement "Put up or shut up".... Really! The full history of 604 was laid out a long time ago for everyone to see. I have offered nothing on the cars history that cannot be backed-up with fact.
The JDHT, well now you have returned to your old harping grounds. You know, or at least if informed you should know, that the JDHT does not certify anything on any car. They will produce a document that will certify what equipment was delivered on a specific car when it was new and left the factory - and only if the car has records of it being sold from the factory. They will not certify that those items are now on any specific car and they will not certify the history or the provenance of any car. In fact the JDHT heritage museum has XKD605 in their collection, probably the most original D-Type long nose around, BUT that car cannot obtain a JDHT certificate - it's not in the "sales book."
That's enough conversation with "lowdrag" for me. You have no factual basis for any opinion you state. It just is not worth wasting time with idiots...
I am continually surprised at how you have hounded 604 over the years with your personal opinion which is based on nothing but whimsical fantasy. You have never seen the car, you know no one that has seen the car, and that includes Less Hughes of Jaguar Magazine sequestered in Australia, and you have never reviewed any of the evidentiary documentation that has been researched on the car and it's components. Frankly you just don't know what you are talking about but you seem to do a lot of talking expecting that to help your opinion. The world experts in D-Type cars have evaluated XKD604 and presented their findings which will be released in the RM catalogue description.
Your statement "Put up or shut up".... Really! The full history of 604 was laid out a long time ago for everyone to see. I have offered nothing on the cars history that cannot be backed-up with fact.
The JDHT, well now you have returned to your old harping grounds. You know, or at least if informed you should know, that the JDHT does not certify anything on any car. They will produce a document that will certify what equipment was delivered on a specific car when it was new and left the factory - and only if the car has records of it being sold from the factory. They will not certify that those items are now on any specific car and they will not certify the history or the provenance of any car. In fact the JDHT heritage museum has XKD605 in their collection, probably the most original D-Type long nose around, BUT that car cannot obtain a JDHT certificate - it's not in the "sales book."
That's enough conversation with "lowdrag" for me. You have no factual basis for any opinion you state. It just is not worth wasting time with idiots...
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff