Dealer sued for fake Aston
Discussion
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/10/03/classi...
Don’t know the ins and outs of this but if it’s described as a “recreation” don’t know how close to authentic it should be.
I’m assuming it was inspected by the buyer or his agents and they were satisfied with what they were getting for the money ( considering a real one is what 20times the price)
Don’t know the ins and outs of this but if it’s described as a “recreation” don’t know how close to authentic it should be.
I’m assuming it was inspected by the buyer or his agents and they were satisfied with what they were getting for the money ( considering a real one is what 20times the price)
The lawsuit you are referring to involves classic car collector Michiel Hehenkamp (75) and his company, USG Invest NG, who are suing Hatfield-based specialist dealership Nicholas Mee & Co in the London High Court for £880,000 ($1.2 million) over a allegedly fake Aston Martin DB4 GT Zagato replica.
The primary details of the lawsuit include:
• The Dispute: Hehenkamp purchased the vehicle under the impression that it was a genuine Aston Martin replica rebuilt to full 1961 DB4 GT Zagato specifications using proper Aston Martin donor parts.
• The "Bitser" Claim: In legal documents, the collector claims he discovered the car is actually a worthless "bitser" cobbled together from miscellaneous old and new parts from completely different car brands. He alleges it lacks an authentic Aston Martin engine, gearbox, or the historic chassis number advertised (which he claims belongs to a different car in Belgium).
• The Dealership's Defense: Nicholas Mee & Co has strongly denied the allegations in court, maintaining they had every reason to believe the classic recreation was entirely legitimate when they sold it
The primary details of the lawsuit include:
• The Dispute: Hehenkamp purchased the vehicle under the impression that it was a genuine Aston Martin replica rebuilt to full 1961 DB4 GT Zagato specifications using proper Aston Martin donor parts.
• The "Bitser" Claim: In legal documents, the collector claims he discovered the car is actually a worthless "bitser" cobbled together from miscellaneous old and new parts from completely different car brands. He alleges it lacks an authentic Aston Martin engine, gearbox, or the historic chassis number advertised (which he claims belongs to a different car in Belgium).
• The Dealership's Defense: Nicholas Mee & Co has strongly denied the allegations in court, maintaining they had every reason to believe the classic recreation was entirely legitimate when they sold it
It isn't. Here's an article not behind a paywall:
https://www.aol.com/articles/car-collector-sues-ov...
https://www.aol.com/articles/car-collector-sues-ov...
Reading that there' something lost in translation I think, '...doesn't even have a genuine Aston Martin engine and gear box..'?
What's it got then? An XK & a Ford Type9
Probably it's a DB6 based car, with the head drilled for twin plugs and a later gearbox than would have been fitted to a DB4 Zagato.
There was a period where these things weren't worth what they are now, and some smart folk squirreled basket cases away for the day that they came good. The unscrupulous will have quickly realised that a DB4 Zagato or DP replica was worth many times the cost to build one, and far exceeded the value a fairly run of the mill DB6 auto would make.
My thinking is that this is probably what's happened here, and that the car is in all ways the same to drive as a genuine DB4 Zagato, but is not constructed of the right bits to be eligible for historic motorsport or to be worth reselling at top book, so the unhappy, bored and recently retired millionaire has set his legal dogs loose in a attempt to get some money back for the car whilst retaining ownership. Especially now the market is soft.
The classic car world has got some very nasty sharks, but the customers quite often give them a run for their money.
What's it got then? An XK & a Ford Type9
Probably it's a DB6 based car, with the head drilled for twin plugs and a later gearbox than would have been fitted to a DB4 Zagato.
There was a period where these things weren't worth what they are now, and some smart folk squirreled basket cases away for the day that they came good. The unscrupulous will have quickly realised that a DB4 Zagato or DP replica was worth many times the cost to build one, and far exceeded the value a fairly run of the mill DB6 auto would make.
My thinking is that this is probably what's happened here, and that the car is in all ways the same to drive as a genuine DB4 Zagato, but is not constructed of the right bits to be eligible for historic motorsport or to be worth reselling at top book, so the unhappy, bored and recently retired millionaire has set his legal dogs loose in a attempt to get some money back for the car whilst retaining ownership. Especially now the market is soft.
The classic car world has got some very nasty sharks, but the customers quite often give them a run for their money.
This happens a lot with early Porsche’s….lots of RS fakes around in particular. I think there are disputes over some of the 917 Le Mans cars.
I heard recently of someone buying an “RS” and sending it to the factory for a restoration….got the phone call that nobody wants “Mr Smith your 2.7 RS is a 911E”
I heard recently of someone buying an “RS” and sending it to the factory for a restoration….got the phone call that nobody wants “Mr Smith your 2.7 RS is a 911E”
Cheib said:
This happens a lot with early Porsche s .lots of RS fakes around in particular. I think there are disputes over some of the 917 Le Mans cars.
I heard recently of someone buying an RS and sending it to the factory for a restoration .got the phone call that nobody wants Mr Smith your 2.7 RS is a 911E
Sad thing is, I find more value in a real 911E or a DB6 Auto than a fake RS or Zagato.I heard recently of someone buying an RS and sending it to the factory for a restoration .got the phone call that nobody wants Mr Smith your 2.7 RS is a 911E
The millionaire edition of the M320d IMHO.
Decky_Q said:
The lawsuit you are referring to involves classic car collector Michiel Hehenkamp (75) and his company, USG Invest NG, who are suing Hatfield-based specialist dealership Nicholas Mee & Co in the London High Court for £880,000 ($1.2 million) over a allegedly fake Aston Martin DB4 GT Zagato replica.
The primary details of the lawsuit include:
The Dispute: Hehenkamp purchased the vehicle under the impression that it was a genuine Aston Martin replica rebuilt to full 1961 DB4 GT Zagato specifications using proper Aston Martin donor parts.
I'm lost, so it's a fake but didn't use the right parts? So a bit too fake?The primary details of the lawsuit include:
The Dispute: Hehenkamp purchased the vehicle under the impression that it was a genuine Aston Martin replica rebuilt to full 1961 DB4 GT Zagato specifications using proper Aston Martin donor parts.
video of the actual car here its clearly stated its a 1959 Aston Martin DB4 series 1 chassis number DB4 217L rebuilt to 1961 Zagato specification.
They refer as Zagato recreation
https://www.nicholasmee.co.uk/news/1959-aston-mart...
That's an Aston straight 6 described as having a factory DB4 cylinder head
video was pre sale according to the web
They refer as Zagato recreation
https://www.nicholasmee.co.uk/news/1959-aston-mart...
That's an Aston straight 6 described as having a factory DB4 cylinder head
video was pre sale according to the web
Edited by Purosangue on Sunday 11th October 10:09
Decky_Q said:
I just copy and pasted the story from my news feed for anyone with pay wall issues.
No idea on the genuine replica bit, maybe he thought it was a rebuilt original car or that it was built using original parts but wasn't an officially manufactured vehicle.
The ‘genuine replica’ vs lookey -likey point will be whether or not it is manufactured from components that ‘could’ have been used to build a genuine DB4 GT Zagato in-period, thereby making it eligible for classic motorsport - ie is the original chassis from a 1961-3 DB4, is the drivetrain from the same car or a car from that same period etc. No idea on the genuine replica bit, maybe he thought it was a rebuilt original car or that it was built using original parts but wasn't an officially manufactured vehicle.
I think the issue here is the duplicate chassis number. Until that has been resolved with the Belgian authorities, he can’t drive it on the road. If the other registered car in Belgium has the authentic chassis number and original engine installed, I can’t see him ever getting this road legal within the EU. The issue probably only came to light because the other car was coincidentally registered in the same country, otherwise might have gone unnoticed. If he considers it worthless, I will give him €50 and arrange collection. 
LotusOmega375D said:
I think the issue here is the duplicate chassis number. Until that has been resolved with the Belgian authorities, he can t drive it on the road. If the other registered car in Belgium has the authentic chassis number and original engine installed, I can t see him ever getting this road legal within the EU. The issue probably only came to light because the other car was coincidentally registered in the same country, otherwise might have gone unnoticed. If he considers it worthless, I will give him 50 and arrange collection.
Agree. Its not one if the original 19, nor a Sanction 2. But was never described as such. But it was sold as that early chassis DB4. Which is said to exist elsewhere..Reminds me of the old Bugatti tricks from the 80s. Bremember that Bugatti raised from the Swiss lake after 80 odd years?? Tufns out a car in a collection in Japan had its chassis number.. and was "known" and "certified" as original.
Its going to get messy.
LotusOmega375D said:
I think the issue here is the duplicate chassis number. Until that has been resolved with the Belgian authorities, he can t drive it on the road. If the other registered car in Belgium has the authentic chassis number and original engine installed, I can t see him ever getting this road legal within the EU. The issue probably only came to light because the other car was coincidentally registered in the same country, otherwise might have gone unnoticed. If he considers it worthless, I will give him 50 and arrange collection.
Ultima Chat | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff