1967 Baldwin Motion Camaro at Auburn

[Souperhigh]

Gentlemen, something is rotten in Denmark. The 1967 Motion Camaro I bought at Auburn has problems, possibly even legal ones. It does have a letter from Joel Rosen stating that it is a real Motion car, but last year it had a letter from Joel Rosen stating it was NOT a Motion car. We have talked to the origional first buyer, and he bought it new in Oklahoma City at Hudiburg Chevrolet in the third week of June 1967. The car was made the second week of May 1967.Yes , we now have a problem!!!!!How can Joel say this car came from Baldwin and is a Motion car, when last year he wrote it was not.And in five weeks from build date to selling date off new car lot in Oklahoma?????Gentlemen, maybe we put to much importance in a letter from Joel Rosen,which received his fee from both previous owners. This is a $100,000 deal that has gone south, I have the car now , waiting for the end result, with my check having had payment stopped!!!! [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/mad.gif[/img]

[COPO]

Sorry to hear the latest news. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/confused.gif[/img] Being a BMotion owner, I'm certainly interested in the outcome of how 2 vastly different letters might have been issued. In the event of not having original paperwork on a BMotion car other than Joel's letter I think it is critical to have an NICB report showing the original selling dealership to be Baldwin Chev. Though not conclusive proof, it goes a long way. Hopefully at a minumum, you end up financially whole. Keep us informed of the outcome.

[Souperhigh]

It was the NCIB report that found the origional dealership, to be Hudipold Chevrolet in Oklahoma City and we now know the list of all the former owners of the car, and have talked to all but one who was killed .In saying the car was unverifiable last year, Joel stated the car had come from Kline Chevrolet in Va.

Doesn't surprise me. I was interested in a motion corvette that Joel once tried to purchase, and could not. The owner told me that Joel felt he had bought the car out from under him. The owner then could not get the car documented, nor could I. I did however pay up the 1500 bucks, and 2 weeks later, got a "no it's not." I wanted a written document stating that it was not, with the vin. #. Never got it. Who knows, it might be a documented car in the future! I still love the motion cars, they are kick a--!!.

[sixtiesmuscle]

Re NICB reports, I also have received several different "originl selling dealer" names on the same car, so, I don't find that unbelievable. I have had to request the info until you get someone who is willing to take the time & interest to do it right. Sad, but true in my experience. Maybe the owners that sold the car at Auburn came up with paperwork, like a bogus NICB report, phoney Motion work orders, etc., and used that to sway Joel. We all know that paperwork doesn't exist on all of his cars, so, sometimes it's got to be put together piece by piece. I am certain this will get ironed out. Hopefully the bad guys will pay an appropriate price. Two things for sure; in my opinion, Joel would never knowingly verify a bogus car, and, because of this, it will now be even harder to get him to verify the real ones. He is a man of integrity and $1500 will not cause him to go against that.

[JoeC]

This sounds like a very unfortunate situation. Have you talked to Joel about the new information you have? What does he say about the car now?

[Stefano]

I don't know this car and hope all works out well for 'SuperHigh'. First Car dealers did trade vehicles amungst themselves and did go across state lines to get them.

The NICB report may only show the dealer, to which the car was delivered originally, direct from the factory, although the NICB has been able to document some dealer trades.

The window from body tag to consumer sale date in itself does not exclude the car from being a Baldwin Motion or Motion Car.

Just trying to look at the positive side [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

[copolocater]

Sorry to hear about the car but already had an inckling.Last year when the car was for sale the gentleman selling the car could not get Joel to verify the car.A few weeks ago I put a post about vendor buying.These guys know that the time frame on verifying a car is minimal and that fear of losing a great deal has people in a split decision bind. That's why the car showed up at auction.The guys selling the car knew there was a larger value that could be placed on that car outside the auction.I give you credit for taking a chance,I probably would have done the same in a similar situation.Good luck.

[Souperhigh]

Well closure is near. The folks at Kruse/eBay auctions which held the large auction in Auburn are a class act. They are taking the car back at their expence and going to sell it as a clone and give the proceeds that are left after they take their due commissions out and give the remaining amount to the seller. The reason and how the new letter from Joel came into being, I will not discuss. If any of you guys frequent the classic car auctions, then you know that the Kruse,the Leake, and the Branson auction that Jim and Kathy Cox has are the top of the line. They are at the top for integrity along with the fine people at Russo-Steele and the Barrett-Jackson auctions. In a crazy world where some people try to make a fast buck, it is nice to deal with people who still do business the old fashioned way, with pride and passion for their work.

[MikeA]

It's good to hear that people still have pride in their business. I'm glad that everything seems to be working out!