Guy restores abandoned van. Who do you side with?

[sugarwood]

This is a great ethical dilemma. I see both sides. It is obvious that the owner was another delusional inept moron who was never going to touch this abandoned project. Owner did not even live at the property. The van was clearly going to disintegrate into the earth, and was left for dead. Someone comes along and steals it, and restores it. It clearly owned by the owner, but damn, you know he would never have even gotten $200 for scrap metal from it.

https://www.hagerty.com/articles-videos/articles/2019/05/17/plea-deal-infuriates-owner-of-the-wild-cherry-van?

[HobieMarty]

Cool van. Growing up in the 70’s I went to a few van and car shows and read all the magazines of the day and just thought the vans were really cool. Now I need to listen to Chevy Van by Sammy Johns. Lol.

As far as the question goes, good that the guy restored the van but if it doesn’t belong to him, then why put out the money out of your own pocket to restore a vehicle that doesn’t belong to you? Good deed? Maybe the owner will just give the van to the guy now? Whatever the reasons, it’s a cool van.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[93nav]

The guy stole the van. Period. Based on this ruling, I should go around and look for abandoned 911's.

[plexiform]

^^Agreed....or abandoned homes to squat in and claim to be your own. These types of cases will take us back to the stone ages. We already have a rule of law.....lets try to continue to enforce them before this whole country goes down the tubes.

[Tervuren]

Originally Posted by plexiform

^^Agreed....or abandoned homes to squat in and claim to be your own. These types of cases will take us back to the stone ages. We already have a rule of law.....lets try to continue to enforce them before this whole country goes down the tubes.

There ARE laws that allow you to fix and take over abandoned property.

[Baz]

If the guy wanted the van, he should have made the effort to contact the owner and negotiate a deal.

That's how it's done by civilised humans.

The van was on private property. There's absolutely no question this was a case of theft.

What disturbs me is all the legal mumbo-jumbo associated with the case. Stuff like this is why our legal system is in need of reform.

My brother had a Chevy van in high school - early 70's. A pic of him from back in the day:

[look 171]

Well, I really need to drive around to find some homes that look not lived in, bring my crew in and claim it when we are done. What was this guy thinking that he can just go and do that?

[john70t]

Dude needed to go to jail for auto theft and title fraud.
(but nice resto all the same)

The van was the property of the owners and only theirs to destroy with rot as they wished.

[fintstone]

If I had 20 rural acres with a fence and locked gate...and wanted to store an old van on it...I would certainly not consider it abandoned or that it was free for anyone to take.


If I found a rusty, seemingly abandoned 67 911S on someone else's fence property, I would not assume it was free to take home...much less register it illegally in another state so I could "wash" the title and then be able to register it in my state that has stricter rules (to prevent theft). I cannot understand why anyone would impugn the owner or consider them trashy because they objected to someone taking their property. Of course they wanted it back and the thief punished.

The owner should file a civil case to get the van back and damages).

[island911]

Location is key.

If the van was abandoned on the restorer's property, then --just like the $1000 the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department charged for towing and storage fees van-- the property owner could charge similar fees. ...which could exceed the value of the van.

But, yeah, what fint said.

[KFC911]

That van was NOT rockin'....now it is

Everybody should have a big azz conversion van at some point in their life....mine was a hoot.

[speeder]

I guess I agree w the consensus here, the guy is a fking thief and I hate thieves. There is absolutely no grey area here if the rightful owner either owned the property it was on or had a legal right to store it on someone else's property.

For the last 20 years, I've known about a completely neglected 1975 911 Euro Carrera coupe sitting in someone's driveway in Hollywood. We are talking about a numbers matching, 2.7 MFI car, not the gutless USA mid-'70s Carrera. No rust. I know the owner peripherally and even talked to him about buying it many years ago. I also know of a 1967 VW Combi van in the Hollywood Hills that has been parked for 30 years and has seen better days. Same thing, 100% original and complete w zero rust. I know that owner as well.

Neither wants to sell and it's their right if they want to have them crushed, 100%. We have a thing called private property rights in this country and the thief in the article should get a baseball bat to the head.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by KC911

That van was NOT rockin'....now it is

Everybody should have a big azz conversion van at some point in their life....mine was a hoot.

Actually, it's not currently rockin', according to the article. He essentially vandalized it so that the owner could not have it back complete.

There are plenty of old vans around to restore if someone wants, they only sold about 2 million of them.

[ossiblue]

Whose side are you on? Seriously?!

There is no more clear cut situation of theft. Period. Any statements about the how true owner was going to let it rot, what a shame, it deserved to be "saved", etc. is irrelevant and just rationalizing B.S. The van belonged to someone else and it was theirs to do with as they pleased. This was not an abandoned vehicle on public property. This was not an abandoned vehicle on someone else's property. This was an abandoned vehicle on the owner's property which, under California law, does not need registration as long as it stays off public roads. Any honest person, in the same situation, would use all reasonable means to find the owner and, if failing to do so, would forget about it.

Sorry, I see no grey area here nor do I see the "argument" from both sides. This guy is not noble and did not do a noble deed. He did it for himself and got caught. He also got a good deal in the plea bargain, as did the owner, IMO. Time for both to move on, as they say.

[red-beard]

A 914 prototype was apparently left on a remote property in California. One of the people on the 914 board thought it abandoned and appropriated it.

If I remember correctly, it did not end well. I think the person who stole it tried to put a mechanic's lien on the vehicle to "legitimize" the theft. And I think the main person involved ran one of the alternative 914 boards, and was part of the reason for the "split" of the two 914 communities.

My only connection to this story, one of the people involved in the theft, about 5 years earlier, sold me my 914/6.

Edit: A few additions, the result was a felony conviction and the prototype was returned to the original owner. And unfortunately, it is disintegrating, somewhere in California...

[sc_rufctr]

After reading the story I'm left scratching my head!

The guy who "stole" the van should give it back. There's no grey area as far as I can see.
He even tried to register it in another state! What more do they need to know? This guy is a dirt bag!

[unclebilly]

I had something similar happen to me when I was 17. I had a Dodge Dart Swinger, 2 Door Hardtop with a 340 (not stock).

This was a really nice car that belonged to a buddy and was vandalized over a girl. I got it for $500 and was going to turn it into a super stock car. I had started some of the work with a buddy. One day it disappeared from his yard. 3 months later, I noticed it parked at a rental property along the highway.

I called the police, they ran the vin and it was still registered to me. The police arranged for me to show up 10 minutes after them with my car trailer and I took my car back. The guy who had it bought it from a local auto wrecker and had spent some money on it and wanted to keep it.

I sold him the car for $750 a few weeks later.

[Tervuren]

Given what happened to the van after the guy was arrested it is likely he did not do this alone.

He knows people to do the work of car thieves.

[dad911]

very strange story. Guy steals van, restores it, won't cooperate with finding it, and it's found stripped, painted, and he gets to keep it.

I knew of a late 60's camaro that was sold. Buyer restored it, but it took a few years. Although he had signed title in hand, never brought it to NJ to register/transfer. Seller got a duplicate title, and reported it stolen, and was trying to get it back......

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by ossiblue

Whose side are you on? Seriously?!

There is no more clear cut situation of theft. Period. Any statements about the how true owner was going to let it rot, what a shame, it deserved to be "saved", etc. is irrelevant and just rationalizing B.S. The van belonged to someone else and it was theirs to do with as they pleased. .....

I'm on Van's side....not the POS thief

Didn't read the article, barely skimmed this thread....but Van wants to rock