| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Simon Johnston
United Kingdom
5999 Posts |
 Posted - 11/11/2017 : 11:24:07
|
I’ve no idea, Charlie. It had a Register number in 2015 and it had disappeared from the printed Register and the online database by 2017. The car itself is apparently alive and well. All very odd.
P.S. See this thread http://www.triple-mregister.org/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=13220
Simon J
J3437 |
Edited by - Simon Johnston on 11/11/2017 11:25:45 |
 |
|
|
Cathelijne
Netherlands
744 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2017 : 11:42:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Colin McLachlan
Cat, I appreciate your contribution to this fascinating debate, and agree with much of what you've said.
Can you please explain the "blue raincoat" reference?
Colin
Thanks, Colin, I appreciate your words, nice to know I am not alone!
Here’s the explanation (originally a Cohen song):
https://youtu.be/I5uCE8wTlRs
|
|
|
|
Cathelijne
Netherlands
744 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2017 : 11:50:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by Simon Johnston
I’ve no idea, Charlie. It had a Register number in 2015 and it had disappeared from the printed Register and the online database by 2017. The car itself is apparently alive and well. All very odd.
P.S. See this thread http://www.triple-mregister.org/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=13220
Simon J
J3437
Posted - 21/10/2017 : 10:05:01
This car is built on a new chassis, with a non-original knuckle. The original knuckle is in the possession of another party and I understand will in due course be re-united with the car.
Regards,
Graham
Simon,
Does Graham’s post not explain? Seems a logical conclusion to draw that when it was first listed and allocated a number, it was not known it did not have an original (numbered) knuckle. Then, when the Register did find out, they withdrew the number. Because that is, presumably, what they thought best at that time. |
|
|
|
McEvoy
United Kingdom
252 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2017 : 11:55:25
|
As Nick has pointed out these postings much of which is very interesting should probably come to an end and as Dick has pointed out they will be discussed at the next Committee meeting when I trust the Secretary will be deluged with constructive ideas but there is one important consequence of having guidelines which was briefly touched upon by Jeremy.
Most Clubs, Associations, Societies encourage some form of competitive interplay between members and in order that this is carried out on a level playing field it is necessary to have some rules, guidelines etc.
It would appear that the majority of members enjoy using their cars in some form of competitive or social event if the number of entries in our Tours, Trials and racing events is anything to go by so as Nick has pointed out be careful with any changes that may end up with the "baby being thrown out with the bath water"
If it ain't broke don't change it!
Bob |
|
|
|
Cathelijne
Netherlands
744 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2017 : 11:55:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by John Reid
Cat, I hope your blue raincoat isn’t torn at the shoulder! 
John R
Mine’s green  |
|
|
|
Ian Bowers
United Kingdom
937 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2017 : 12:10:32
|
Bob, I assume you have read through all the pages and comments, in this thread. In which case you will have seen that there are already plenty of constructive ideas on how this issue might be handled, and many illustrations of where the current Guidelines are tested to braking point.
No doubt the summary being prepared for the next Committee meeting will provide all the details.
Hopefully the Committee will see to issuing both the summary document and the minutes of its discussion. With these in place the subject may well then be put to rest.
Ian Bowers
OD 6791
J3 3772 |
|
|
|
Simon Johnston
United Kingdom
5999 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2017 : 12:19:51
|
Cat,
In the same thread, George Eagle said the knuckle was lost. But that’s missing the point. At some stage between 2015 and 2017 a decision was taken by someone to ‘de Register’ the car and I’m curious as to how and why that decision was taken. Was it at the request of the owner or another party or did the Register take it upon itself to make the decision. And if the latter,who made the decision and on what basis?
Simon J
J3437 |
|
|
|
John James
United Kingdom
960 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2017 : 14:23:25
|
.......but Graham Arrondelle wrote:
"The original knuckle is in the possession of another party and I understand will in due course be re-united with the car."
Lost, or in the possession of another party?
Or, perhaps, the other party has lost it?
JOHN JAMES
|
|
|
|
Foz
United Kingdom
760 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2017 : 14:50:16
|
Dear MMM-ers,
having spent many years on the Triple-M Register C'tee and done several different jobs I agree with Graham A's points and reiterate they (c'tee members) are volunteers who are also enthusiasts.... so be nice to them...yes express views and ideas but do it in a positive way and even offer to help. Don't be surprised if it is not perfect......just consider the EU's attempts to categorise "an historic vehicle"..... large c'tee spending lots of euroes with many meetings.... briefly and only in one language..... Must be to specification as per manufacturer and maintained by parts made by the manufacturer... etc etc..... was pointed out that many French cars with names starting in A and B would be unusable as the manufacturer was no longer extant. We would be OK as the Chinese could make our Triple-M spares. next try... maintained by authorised/certified/accredited manufacturers (at what cost to Man in shed making bits for the 4 surviving Horstman cars......made in Bath).... who checks?.... Spec as manufactured also causes issues as retrospective legislation would require alterations.....and so it goes on and WHY? What is the purpose? They are for fun for us but to Governments they are a source of revenue and to Eurocrats a source of annoyance....... so spare a thought for our c'tee members when next putting pen to paper... oh dear we don't do that any more do we.....
FOZ |
|
|
|
sven
Sweden
423 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2017 : 15:21:30
|
Oh dear.
" so spare a thought for our c'tee members when next putting pen to paper... oh dear we don't do that any more do we.....
FOZ"
Agree on both counts FOZ, people don't spare a thought and they don't put pen to paper. Instead quick replies, preferably on so called social media, Twitter etc.
Yours
Sven
Sweden
|
|
|
|
Ian Bowers
United Kingdom
937 Posts |
Posted - 12/11/2017 : 08:37:02
|
One more 'outlier' which tests the Guidelines is Ian George's J3 3766. He claims to have the knuckle and many original parts in store. At the same time, what he claims is a replica J3 3776 is being finished in the USA.
Note: I use the 'what he claims' wording to avoid any risk of libel, which is a small but pertinent element in these discussions. It is the reason why I believe the only person who can make statements about the provenance of a car is the owner making the claims, not the Register Committee. Hence the recommendation to publish all claims to MMM provenance and their owners supporting information.
Ian Bowers
OD 6791
J3 3772 |
|
|
|
KevinA
New Zealand
668 Posts |
Posted - 12/11/2017 : 08:52:57
|
For what it's worth, my main comment is that the most anyone can hope for is transparency. I suspect most (and it seems one particular from his persistence) would like to understand register decisions, even if the answer was for legal/privacy etc reasons we can't tell you. Silence is the worst thing as it breeds distrust.
Equally we would all like to see openness from the various owners. Regrettably the commercial considerations sometimes get in the way of this. My support is firmly behind the registrars who do what they do as a thankless service, not because they want to sell a particular car, whatever its provenance |
|
|
|
Simon Johnston
United Kingdom
5999 Posts |
Posted - 12/11/2017 : 11:04:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by KevinA
For what it's worth, my main comment is that the most anyone can hope for is transparency. I suspect most (and it seems one particular from his persistence) would like to understand register decisions, even if the answer was for legal/privacy etc reasons we can't tell you.
Who could you be thinking of, Kevin
Let's just summarise what we, i.e. Register members at large, know about NA0356. It was on the Register with number 2226 for at least thirty years up until 2016. In the 2017 printed Register the car is listed but with no Register number. In the online database the car does not appear at all. When this was queried, initially by Russ Jackson in another thread, the Chairman said 'it has not been accorded a Register number'. The Registrar then said: 'This car is built on a new chassis, with a non-original knuckle. The original knuckle is in the possession of another party and I understand will in due course be re-united with the car.' The Secretary then said that the knuckle 'is missing, presumed lost'.
My query was simply to ask what happened to result in the 'de-Registration' of the car sometime in the last twelve months after thirty years or more on the Register. If indeed there are commercial or privacy or legal reasons why an explanation cannot be given, then at least this should be said. Furthermore, who actually made the decision to 'de-Register' the car, if that is what has happened, and when?
As you say, Kevin, it's about transparency
Simon J
J3437 |
|
|
|
Ian Bowers
United Kingdom
937 Posts |
Posted - 12/11/2017 : 12:33:48
|
For clarity Ian George's J3 is 3766, please excuse my transcription error part way through the posting above.
Ian Bowers
OD 6791
J3 3772 |
|
|
|
Nick Feakes
USA
3339 Posts |
Posted - 12/11/2017 : 13:29:44
|
Simon
I am not on the Committee so I do not have any "inside" knowledge of the situation surrounding this car, but I can think of several reasons why it may not be possible for anyone to immediately give you the answer you so desperately seek.
The most obvious one is the matter is still under discussion, maybe awaiting more information before being able to make a decision.
Maybe another party is disputing the evidence. It could be very contentious for the committee to make any comment before the issue is resolved.
Maybe there is a threat of legal action.
In any event, I am absolutely certain there is no conspiracy and the fact that there has been no "official" response to your request tells me there is a very good reason why not.
Nick
Webmaster |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
