A successful criminal prosecution or civil action does not require a human witness to the crime having occurred. Enough physical and/or circumstantial evidence is, in most cases, more than often enough to surpass the minumum standard - in a civil action which is the preponderance of the evidence, and in a criminal action, beyond a reasonable doubt. Jurors just love that CSI stuff these days. They just eat it up. One of these cases would involve all sorts of cool toolmark and trace evidence testimony. Imagine someone's entire toolbox being used to convict them when they match the microscopic scratch marks on the back of the VIN plate to that favorite screwdriver in the top left drawer.
As for Dynacorn, they only refer you back to your local state statutes, their FAQ section would be of no precedential legal value in court.
By the way did anybody see this, just hot off of the CNN newswire:
"The leader of a group of African-American converts to Islam was fatally shot Wednesday, federal authorities said.
Luquman Ameen Abdullah was one of 11 men charged Tuesday with conspiracy to commit federal crimes, including theft from interstate shipments, mail fraud to obtain the proceeds of arson, illegal possession and sale of firearms, AND TAMPERING WITH MOTOR VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS, the FBI said in a news release."
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/28/...ing/index.html
That is all well and good in a case where someone dies and there are unexhaustable funds to prosecute something like that. However in the case of a rebodied car it would certainly be a civil case with individual funds being spent based on one party believing they were defrauded with the purchase of a mis-represented vehicle that was something less than it is. HUGH dollars to be spent and a lot of risk of the outcome, HIGHLY unlikely it would ever go to or see an end if started. This would require to first determine if the car was restored or rebodied OR if in fact their is a difference in the eyes of the law AND if in fact there were any laws broken doing so. Sound familiar? Go back to the "catch 22"
You seemed to have missed Dynacorns first option:
Answer: 2005/06/29
A Vehicle or Vessel Identification Number (VIN) is issued by a manufacturer or State Licensing authority. There are three ways for a vehicle to obtain a number.
1) An existing VIN on a vehicle that is titled in your name can be transferred to a repair part (as instructed by your State authority).
2) A number may be issued by your State to ID a custom built vehicle when it passes a safety and number verification inspection.
3) A licensed manufacturer issued a VIN when the vehicle (or vessel) is made and ready for delivery. This can only be issued when a "turn key" (completed) car, truck, boat or aircraft has been manufactured.
Dynacorn is a G.M. licensed manufacturer of replacement body shells, which is a PART not a complete vehicle. You can attach an existing V.I.N. to a replacement part for repair or restoration as per the Federal law.
You will also note in my first post that I too made reference to other state laws.
"it is my understanding that some States have laws against it that do not spell out exceptions for the hobby. However, any links to individual State laws that have been sent to me I HAVE found a similar exception to the Fed. law."
No sense arguing this any further.
In closing I will say as I did long ago in this post, it is something that is going to be argued for a long time. Even if someone takes this to task and the law makes a determination that there is a difference in restoration vs. rebody there will STILL be people that argue it as an ETHICAL thing.
I don't believe there is any State or Federal task force out there looking for people that are moving V.I.N.s from one car to another between two cars that they own legally and are not stolen for the purpose of restoring a car. It would be a HUGH waste of taxpayers money.