| Author |
 Topic  |
|
gerard van der veen
United Kingdom
152 Posts |
 Posted - 13/09/2020 : 00:28:59
|
Just a small question for the register as I am not in my garage and browsing the 'Net'.
My eyes fell on this MG TA 1934(?), photo 1 currently for sale in Italy,... didn't know that TA was produced that early, but being a 'racer', maybe ahead of it's time... like it's independent front steering...
The accompanied doc's, showed race provenance, revealing a (possible) chassis PA0909, but the rather fuzzy photo wasn't conclusive... until I googled PA single seater, popping up that the same PA was for sale, elsewhere for 17.000 euro's less, photo 2 and clearly stating a PA, 1934, chassis PA0909... with a special 'O' engine... (Q??)...
Consulting the MMMregister, I found this under PA0909, photo 3, alive & kicking in the UK???
Who's the real PA0909...
Gerard.
gerard van der veen |
|
|
Ian Bowers
United Kingdom
937 Posts |
Posted - 13/09/2020 : 07:42:04
|
Never let a good scam go to waste!
Ian Bowers
OD 6791
J3 3772 |
 |
|
|
DickMorbey
United Kingdom
3672 Posts |
Posted - 13/09/2020 : 11:15:47
|
This car may be the Monk Special - see https://www.triple-mregister.org/forums/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=6334
It's believed that the Monk Special is PA0881, albeit it appears to be carrying the Works guarantee plate for PA0909. That understandinmg was verified by Mike Hawke correspondence in 2001 and further amplified in e-mail exchanges in 2008 between Peter Green, Bob Clare and others.
Dick Morbey
PA-PB 0743
Frieth, Oxon, UK |
|
|
|
gerard van der veen
United Kingdom
152 Posts |
Posted - 13/09/2020 : 23:38:59
|
In the register, the Monk Special, is described as 'perhaps' the PA0881. Further emails are likely conrtributing the 'provenance of the Monk, but that is not the point here. Beside the 'potential' scam; the UK PA0909 is not certain of it's authentic registration. I see more a 'potential' Bugatti scandal.
I am interested to know what the MGCC, MMM register, Bulletin, etc will undertake about the fact that two cars are using the same chassis number (not the 'decorative garantee' plate, but claiming a similar historical authentication. In my understanding, the DVLA & MGCC, are in 'close' contact to guarantee that not two the cars are operating under the same 'certification of authenticity'. Are there 'any' actions taken by the MMMregister, (under the umbrella of the MGCC) to pick up these 'questionable practices'? I imagine that the DVLA is not acting upon a car outside its UK jurisdiction, but the UK car, claiming the PA0909 is clearly not certain of it's 'authenticity' record. It does show that the MMMregister is only 'valid' when photo's (relevant stamped chassis number knuckle head, bonnet & 'decorative' garantee plaque) are supporting the registers written evidence, otherwise why having a register... and allowing serious consequences of our heritage, financial validation, future reduced to zero.
gerard van der veen |
|
|
|
Onno
Netherlands
1026 Posts |
Posted - 14/09/2020 : 05:08:23
|
The DVLA will only act when it is a UK matter.
Afaik the single seater was in Italy.
Onno "J,D" Könemann |
|
|
|
Dolts
United Kingdom
1128 Posts |
|
|
Colin Butchers
United Kingdom
1479 Posts |
Posted - 14/09/2020 : 10:40:15
|
The Register never professes to guarantee the origins of any particular car, but it provides a wealth of information for any potential buyer to make a judgement. The Monk Special (the MBMG Special) has been fully documented and this information is in the public domain. The car in its current form claims to have a special O (presumably Q) engine. The car certainly did have a genuine Q engine at one stage - possibly the most highly developed Q engine of them all, which propelled QA0256 around Brooklands at over 130 mph. Whether the current car has much or any of that engine is doubtful. Certainly the Robin Jackson/Zillwood Milledge crank and rods (which made the car go so well) are no longer fitted to the car now and at present there is no information available as to what block and cylinder head is in use. Still, it is a very nice racer with a good history. I hope that a U.K. buyer will be found to bring it back home.
Colin B. |
|
|
|
Onno
Netherlands
1026 Posts |
Posted - 14/09/2020 : 12:05:48
|
sorry should have said "the DVLA will only act when road registered in the UK"
And I expect that special wont be road registered.
Onno "J,D" Könemann |
|
|
|
pauly45
United Kingdom
435 Posts |
Posted - 14/09/2020 : 13:03:09
|
Wasn't there a case in the last few years of two UK cars apparently having the same chassis number?
How did that resolve?
What actually can be done if one car has a clear chassis stamp, yet it is also claimed by another.
It would be reasonable to assume one of them is incorrect. |
|
|
|
gerard van der veen
United Kingdom
152 Posts |
Posted - 14/09/2020 : 13:59:57
|
Authenticity & provenance are the backbone of our existence on earth, legally, morally and finally financially. I am surprised that this topic is taken lightly and with little ‘fraternity’ effect; had expected an ‘harsher’ attitude by the ‘Registers Responsible Owner’, but have to admit, it is ‘just’ posted, but the ‘read’ number is already roughly on 300!
So far, one, than you Pauly45, has touched the core, but again it is a question…
Mover over, all focus goes to the ‘pedigree racing’ Monk, whereas the less historical known ‘chassis’, unaware driver, 'probably' real PA0909, has been lured into a public photo album register, prone to be copied and stolen of his/her heritage. Of course no guarantees can be given by the register, but it appears now that participating in ‘publishing your ‘precious’ authenticity details (the real number stamps) will make it easier(!!) for culprits to ‘steel once genuine authenticity’ starting a fraudulent route. Ergo not being protected and acted upon by the MG fraternity (with ‘formal’ links to the DVLA), starts ‘jittering’. I even now start to think it advisory for all MG MMM owners to ‘remove/refrain from’ all their sensitive information downloaded on the MG MMM Register, but only publish/keep ‘photo genetic fun’ purposes imagery, to keep our nice ‘anecdotal’ info for what it is worth (like enthusiasm) and to caress our petrol ego’s.
Unless, one can convince me otherwise, but historical facts have shown a double standard applied concerning ‘authentic’ chassis numbers. In the past one was refrained to use a ‘vacant’ authentic number as its history was known to be manufactured and used but with further history unknown. Only a frame for a frame is a logic reasoning, but if you have al the ‘genuine parts’ and an authentic looking frame, to be ‘stamped’…. And now when two frames are identically stamped… Making fake old family car photo’s is easy; everybody knows ‘Adobe’ (a wonderful photo enhancing computer software program) is a wonderful tool….
Jaguar is currently ‘manufacturing old racers’ to -fill up- their ‘factory archived –open- race car numbers, for multiple six zero pound each and for their ‘chosen only’… The Bugatti club is considering legal actions against the UK DVLA as more v5 are created than the cars Bugatti authentic made in its factory (-archives).
The DVLA is depending on club or brand archives…. A lot of the (genuine) MG archives are filled in by ‘graphite pencil’… very handy…
I think, an old race banger ‘the Monk’ despite being it in Italy, not having its genuine testosterone parts anymore as I read, one can discuss, would you like to have it back to the UK and then fighting it the PA0909 owner under ‘unequal terms’, just taking ‘simple provenance’ from the UK car??? Yes I know the Monk was perhaps PA0881 or the RA0251 or 0256, or 0260… but now it allowed (no action) to re-start ‘a live’ under PA0909…. can we concentrate a little more on the ‘humble PA0909’ and its protection…
A discussion… is needed and our ‘humble provenance ‘ protected, especially the ones who don’t have a rich and ‘formally’ backed by superiors in the top hierarchy of a brand… we only have a club fraternity….
gerard van der veen |
|
|
|
Onno
Netherlands
1026 Posts |
Posted - 14/09/2020 : 17:42:38
|
That discussion has been had extensively about K3015 or K3015-2.
That case shows you can not generalise a solution or answer.
And you most certainly can not when not involved (owner of one of the cars)
Perhaps that is why most don’t care to reply
Onno "J,D" Könemann |
|
|
|
Colin Butchers
United Kingdom
1479 Posts |
Posted - 14/09/2020 : 17:44:25
|
If anyone is interested in replying, I am sure they will. For my part, I am about to doze off to sleep.
Colin B. |
|
|
|
MarkH
United Kingdom
149 Posts |
Posted - 14/09/2020 : 20:36:14
|
Yes, actually, I am interested in replying...
To the Committee
Mr Van der Veen is entitled to comment - as we all are - without dismissive responses, particularly the response of Mr Butchers, which I found unnecessarily rude, and in fact ‘disparaging’.
Is this not a breach of the forum rules of etiquette?
I look forward to your (public) response.
Thank you.
MSH |
|
|
|
John James
United Kingdom
959 Posts |
Posted - 14/09/2020 : 22:03:54
|
I am also interested in replying.
This is a subject worthy of serious debate.
Dealing with DVLA over the past few years has taught me never to give up and never to take 'no' for an answer when you know that right is on your side and natural justice must prevail.
Dealing with DVLA has also taught me to pursue a justified claim outside of the Agency as I have successfully done on two previous occasions.
Yes, one must 'go through the motions' and argue one's case up through the DVLA'S hierarchy right up to Chief Executive level, but I have found that this is an exercise in futility as on both occasions the pyramid supported itself when any objective consideration would have reached a different conclusion.
Thank heavens then for the Independent Complaints Assessors (ICA) who are truly independent of DVLA and are able to reach a different conclusion.
There is currently an N-type which I believe is not entitled to the registration mark it is carrying as I believe it belongs to another N. When the time comes I shall not be taking 'no' for answer and will not be giving up!
JOHN JAMES DVLA representative, MG Octagon Car Club
|
Edited by - John James on 14/09/2020 22:06:19 |
|
|
|
Simon Johnston
United Kingdom
5985 Posts |
Posted - 14/09/2020 : 23:49:31
|
Is there really a problem here? The single seater for sale in Italy would seem to have a well documented provenance as the Monk Special and presumably the front suspension modifications resulted in the all important front knuckle with chassis number disappearing. Remember, it was built as a special when such things were not important. For whatever reason it carries the guarantee plate of PA0909 and this has probably been useful in its movement across European borders as it gives the car some sort of identity, if not its real one. Were it to come back to the UK the DVLA would have absolutely no interest in it unless it was to be registered for use on the road and I’m sure that the absence of its original chassis number, not to mention it’s lack of compliance with Construction and Use regs, would make that an interesting challenge.
Interestingly in the description of the car in the link that Mark Dolton posted it’s described as both PA0909 and PA0881.
I suspect that the owner of PA0909 would have no difficulty proving that his (or her) car is exactly that as it most likely has its correct front knuckle.
So I think we’re a long way from it being a scam. Old cars acquire odd identities for all sorts of reasons, but using a guarantee plate belonging to another car as a way of satisfying customs officials when crossing borders is not a big deal and I do rather think it’s a storm in a tea cup.
Simon J
J3437 |
|
|
|
Colin Butchers
United Kingdom
1479 Posts |
Posted - 15/09/2020 : 10:41:12
|
Rude - and disparaging ! Moi ! Yes Mark, you could be right. However, I am not like that all the time. I think that there could be one or two people out there who think I am quite a pleasant person most of the time.
Colin B. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
