[PeteLeathersac]

Keep in mind too that it's not impossible the buyer and seller could be the same person/group?
Not specific to this car and situation but faceless phone bidders can sometimes be shill bidders and/or sellers buying their own cars when final bids in are too low.
Obviously shill bids are illegal and unfair too but surprisingly it's not uncommon at major auctions, nothing wrong with anyone buying their own car back though especially considering the current trend of no reserve auctions.

Being we haven't seen enough here to be conclusively certain of anything regarding this car being referred to as ZL1 #48, we can't really call it anything other than suspect for now can we?
Again it's too bad the seller didn't present all facts/details here first as if all was just it most likely would've sold for waaaay more?

Considering recent values of any reputed ZL1's including some w/ murky details, has having cars lost in a haze of rebodies and hokey tags/paperwork/history simply become accepted now...even fashionable?
Does being the first to exibit a car to match a ZL1 identity somehow make anyone the keeper of that identity regardless of right/wrong or their example containing even one single component of the original car?
If buyers are willing to pay big $ for a collection of parts and a claimed ZL1 identity it won't be surprising to see a few more appear before the dust settles and 'available identities' are all used up?
What's interesting is of the few identities left 'up for grabs' some still have legal owners/insurance co's that can lay claim to a car bearing that identity so affixing #'s to a collection of parts and restoration costs is a risky venture that could quickly backfire?

Back to the regular show!
[img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/beers.gif[/img]
~ Pete