Determining Provenance with no Vin

[cactusman]

I would still council caution. Unless the vendor or agents acting on their behalf can prove the identity of the vehicle allowing checks to be made regarding its history then I would not proceed. Even if buying for bits, if it subsequently turns out to be stolen you loose it and may well have some very serious explaining to do. Possession of stolen property is an offence and ignorance is no defence I am afraid. It is pretty obvious from the photos that it has parts from more then one car so at best it is going to be a bit of a hybrid. Unless you can be certain it is completely legitimate then you take a huge risk in my view. As other post here will confirm, E types do go missing and the thieves ultimately have to legitimise their goods in order to convert to her majesty's beer tokens. Hiding in a barn for a bit, removing obvious evidence of ID and mish mashing might not be an obvious route but it is not beyond possibility. A stolen Aston Martin was recently recovered having languished in a lock up in Holland for an age....caveat emptor!!!!

[christopher storey]

Julian : being pedantic, I'm afraid your statement that ignorance is no defence to a charge of handling stolen property is incorrect. The charge always requires " knowing or believing the same to have been stolen " to be proved . Nonetheless, I agree with your general premise that there is something very suspicious about this , and that without further proof of its legitimacy it should not be touched

[Rolls 912]

What would it be worth as parts?
The engine is a 3.8 from a saloon

[christopher storey]

It gets worse and worse . What sort of saloon ? mark IX . 3.8 mark 2 , 3.8 S type or 3.8 mark X are all possibilities . Only the mark X will have a straight port head . Incidentally, your first post said there was no engine, although the ( later) photographs show an engine to be present

[Rolls 912]

Thanks.

It does have an engine although it's not matching and I believe from another model. I have no idea whether it has even been rebuilt - caveat emptor. 3.8 Litre Jaguar engine numbered ZB3903-8 which purportedly came from a Jaguar Mk X.

If it was an early Porsche I could tell you the bolt sizes for most components and the correct angle of the houndstooth weave! E-types, I have absolutely not a clue so excuse the ignorance.

I've seen these sort of posts on the pelican forums. Last minute, rush, rush. Sounds cheap etc. They used to amuse me. Yet here I am posting the very same!

However unless I can get better assurity of it been a legitimate vehicle I'm going to give it a miss. There are no identifying marks that I can find and from what I read above, even the dash is a ring in.

[Moeregaard]

I'd definitely run away from this one--and quickly. There are too many complete cars out there to bother with something like this. When looking into any car built up from multiple "organ donors," one has to realize that it only takes a single stolen component to make the entire thing suspect. Not worth the risk or trouble in my view.

[steve3.8]

Hi Rolls ,

With the gearbox serial number the JDHT http://www.jaguarheritage.com/t/archive will be able to see which chassis number/car that gearbox left the factory with and most often the original registration number , that's the only evidence of it's origin you have , if they have issued a heritage certificate to someone for that chassis other than the deceased then you have an answer .

[Dawnpatrol]

Davids advice is the best I've read in this post. If the sum of the parts is significantly more than the asking price then I'd have it. Then spend some serious time digging to uncover it's identity. If that is unsuccessful, and I would be prepared to give it quiet a bit of time as information has a habit of surfacing eventually, then you have a valuable spares cashe.
I absolutely accept the possibility that there could be a negative back story, but there are many older attempts at restoration where a second hand set of the correct dash panels where not available, it could be originally LHD. As others have said, the monocoque under examination will give up a reasonably accurate period of manufacture.
We have all attended Stoneleigh and seen the vast array of un identified original E-type parts, getting less in the last few years, for sale.
There are thousands of E-types out there that have been restored with the assistance of Spares days, who is to say that that second hand roof panel or boot lid or bulkhead has not come from ill-gotten gains. You just don't know for sure, you only have your instinct and integrity to guide you after listening to the sellers story.
Just because this appears to be a collection of parts that could never have started life together is no evidence to declare it dodgy, IMHO
A couple of years ago a walked away from a RHD 4.2 FHC that had been "restored", it had far too many none period original parts.Nice thing but clearly a bitsa car but legitimate ID reg etc, thinking I should have bought it and spent money adding value by putting it right, who would know now? It could have been a built from chassis plate up kind of car, maybe that's why I did.
Just making an alternate perspective!!

[38E]

If the engine came from a 3.8 Jaguar Mk X, then it's virtually the same as an E-Type engine and could be a worthwhile alternative. A set of E-Type intake manifolds would be required instead of the Mk X versions. Someone has already done some work on that engine anyway in order to make it fit the chassis. A Mk X sump would be too wide, I think.

As regards value, a very very rough and non-running '62 Coupe that I know, with a completely shot interior and which also had a twin carb saloon engine installed was recently sold for $38,000 to someone in Holland via eBay. Not quite the same because this one had a title and (LOL) a JHT certificate but it may give an idea.

[cactusman]

Christopher. I mean that just because you did not know it was pinched does not mean you keep it. To be prosecuted there has to be evidence to prove you either did the stealing or knew it was pinched. However if it turns out to be pinched you loose it...simple as that. I spoke at length to a chap at a car show a couple of years back. He had a db7 but had bought an E type from a dealer. I did not get the whole story but the gist was that the garage sold it as theirs to sell. It was a fixer upper and was around £17k so he shipped it to a restoration place. After six months or so he had spent a further £20k +. Then one evening he had a visit from the police to tell him the vehicle had been seized from the restoration company as a suspected stolen car. It seems that the rightful owner had deposited the car with the dealer to either sell or store (bit iffy) . The seller then lost contact with the dealer for reasons unknown. The dealer tried to contact the owner for them to collect and pay up for storage but was unable to contact the owner. Simultaneously the owner, who had moved, was trying to contact the dealer...not sure why the contact failed....anyway the dealer finally got fed up and sold the car to recover his costs (and a bit more one suspects). Mean time the owner having failed to connect with the dealer had reported the car stolen. The restoration company at some point ran an HPI and the car came up as pinched hence the visit from the plod. The quite genuine purchaser lost the car and his £20k. He was going through the legal process to recover his £17 grand but, from what I gathered, the chance of getting the extra £20k off the rightful owner for the works done was pretty slim.

[christopher storey]

Julian : I agree that the civil position is much more difficult than the criminal position, but the facts you have described could come from a Bar Finals question paper ! The position at law is hugely compicated where a chattel such as a car is delivered to a mercantlie agent such as a garage for sale , as to whether the garage has actual or ostensible authority to sell, and whether a sale effected by the garage even without notice to the owner is binding . Then there is the question of possessory lien of a bailee for reward .The position of a buyer without notice of the possible defect in title is also complicated. And then there may be questions of market overt ...... Interesting though

[cactusman]

It was a convoluted story and I don't think even the poor chap I spoke to knew the whole of it. Certainly I got a summary and not all of it Quite added up. Quite apart from anything else a reputable dealer would not simply have flogged the car. The interesting bit was that the chap had paid for an HPI check that came back clear when he purchased. Only some time later did the car get reported stolen....and before anyone asks...I have no idea how the dealer fiddled the v5 ownership either but there we are....it was only when, for reasons unknown but I rekon they got suspicious for some reason, the restoration company asked for an HPI that it then showed as reported stolen......

[Rolls 912]

May I ask some other questions relating to the engine please ? Purists look away.

This car has a rebuilt 3.8 Mark X engine. The car was made with a 4.2.

Should I:
bin the engine and start again at considerable cost?
modify this engine to make it a 4.2?

Or, do I simply leave it?

[politeperson]

Does it come with a V5 or not?

James

[christopher storey]

A 3.8 cannot be modified to become a 4.2 . The bore spacings are different

[neil4444]

http://www.graysonline.com/sale/5020099 ... nual-coupe

[64etype]

Interesting. Would appear to be the subject vehicle. So did Rolls 912 (or someone else) buy it or did the seller withdraw the offering? In any case, this bears additional and continued scrutiny by the world E-type community. I helped a lady sell an '64 S1 OTS with a 4.2 engine some years ago. When it was sold, I posted a note to Etypedata that this VIN did not have the original engine as of the sale date. The seller (original owner) told me the original 3.8 engine had been scrapped in the 70's due to a cracked block. Nonetheless, it will likely show up with a 3.8 (and the proper serial number) somewhere down the road. Difference between "determining" and manufacturing a Provenance....

[Rolls 912]

Okay 3.8 it is.

May I ask what are the major differences between a mark X and an e type engine?

[christopher storey]

There are no major differences between the two , but the ancillaries were different originally, notable the sump, carburetters ( which had shorter bellhousings ) and the inlet manifold which was dropped at its outer side on the E to give bonnet clearance . You still do not explain where this car is. have you seen it? Are you in fact in Australia ? or what??

[Heuer]

Melbourne I believe.