Changing VIN

[TT Oversteer]

Does anyone know the legal ramifications on re-numbering a project car?

Let's say that you hypothetically have two cars that you legally own and have titles to. You want to create one car from the parts of both donors.

At one end of the spectrum you remove all the parts from the newer car and install them on the older car. At the other end of the spectrum you cut the sheetmetal containing the VIN stamping from the old car and weld it in to the new car.

At what point does this become tampering with the VIN (illegal) and subject to fraud or impounding of said vehicle if something should bring attention to your mods, i.e. how BIG a piece of the car do you need to cut out around the VIN so that it still remains a "car".

As we all like to build project cars and modify our cars I'm just curious what experiences some of you may have had (good or bad) with respect to this topic.

Just to be crystal clear: I'm not suggesting any fraudulent or illegal activity here, just wondering where the line is drawn legally in regard to special construction vehicles.

[javadog]

When you remove the VIN from one car and put it on another, that's tampering. It doesn't matter how big the piece is that is "attached." It's OK to cut out damaged pieces from the old car and replace them with newer but when you start approaching say, half the car, you have one car that is made from two and that kills the value, even if VIN tampering is not an issue.

If you want to use the "better" tub in your project, why do you want to change the chassis number?

JR

[tonythetarga]

Originally Posted by javadog

If you want to use the "better" tub in your project, why do you want to change the chassis number?
JR

My guess is that since he's in CA, this must be a smog issue.

[zippy_gg]

Or maybe the cars are from different years and he wants to "keep" the better year.

[tonythetarga]

Could be...and sometimes the cynic in me can't help but surface . Either way, and I'm sure the intentions are fine, but the legality may be questionable.
.02

[GaryR]

Bet a lot of guys with rustbucket longhoods would love to buy a rust free galvanized SC roller, strip it to the tub, make it a early longhood and swap VINs!

[Kemo]

I read somewhere, that some of the factory race cars have been "re-bodied" by porsche over the years in Germany.

for some, the shell is just another part of the car. I would think only Porsche could get away with swapping Vins around

[Grady Clay]

TT Oversteer,

Please give us two specific (hypothetical) years.



If one (hypothetically) had a 1969 coupe that was too rusty and an ’83 911SC coupe donor, I think it possible with some serious work.

Critical would be installing a front clip to use the dual battery and non-impact bumper brackets. This also has the latch panel for the long hood. It would be similar for the rear bumper attachments and early quarter bumpers.

Needless to say, you need all the normal ‘long-hood; conversion pieces; front bumper, front fenders, rear panel, bumpers and quarter bumpers.

You need to decide about rocker panels and side trim.

The interior is relatively easy to convert from ’83 to ’69 except for the dash vents and heater/fresh air controls.
Having both sets complete makes this possible. Converting to ’69 carries with it the ‘69 production number and the crayon numbers under the dash pad.

Depending on S/R, etc., if you wanted to retain opening rear quarter windows, you can swap roof structures. However … the ’69 roof structure is not as reinforced as the ’83.

You would need to decide to retain or not the power brakes.

Since you still have the short-hood parts (bumpers, inner structures, front fenders, hood, etc., they have value. Sell them to a licensed salvage operation and donate the chassis remains. Take photos and get a proper receipt with VIN from the later chassis.

With a conversion like this, it is very difficult to argue for or against it being ‘tampering’ vs. a repair. To complete the fact that it is a repair, you could turn in the VIN and title from the later car as being salvaged and no longer a vehicle.

Retain photographs and every bit of documentation.
Keep a file with the car – forever.

Some states may want you to get a new state ‘assigned VIN’ for a project like this – if you ask.

I would argue that there is always a 1969 911 coupe and parts were removed (cut) from the ’83 911 coupe to make repairs, destroying the ’83 in the process.

Best,
Grady

PS: "I am not an attorney. I do not give legal advice. This is not legal advice. You should consult an attorney."

[TT Oversteer]

Tonythe targa:

My guess is that since he's in CA, this must be a smog issue.

GaryR:

Bet a lot of guys with rustbucket longhoods would love to buy a rust free galvanized SC roller, strip it to the tub, make it a early longhood and swap VINs!

You guys both hit on elements of my train of thought on this project.

In dreaming up my ideal project 911 I eventually wind up with something along the lines of the Singer 911. A lightweight longhood car with a fully galvanized body, modern suspension and brakes, G50 box and a 3.6 that's optimized for track use i.e. headers, chip, no smog.

This would be a true "Frankenporsche" and therefore would have no real resale value other than basically the sum of its parts.

So, for the sake of arguement and entertainment, let's say I take a '73 911T and cut off the front clip (front accident damage and rusty), remove the floor pans and longitudinals (rusted out) and cut off the torsion housing to replace it with a G50 unit. And while we're at it remove the roof to get rid of the sunroof and drip rails. Is it still a 73 911T? I think most people would agree it is legally still a '73T.

Now what if I use my '87 Carrera tub for "parts" and replace all of the above onto what's left of the 73? So far we are "legal" and "moral" as long as there is documentation?

So why not cut a portion of the 73 front clip/dash/a pillar out and weld it into the 87 carrera tub? Now for some reason we are "tampering". Where have we gone wrong? Is it in the intent? Is it in the % of how much of the original titled car is left? Is it in the definition of what "is" is?

Grady, your scenario seems plausible but at what point are you just creating way too much work for yourself?

I have seen several projects on this board that involve MAJOR sectioning and replacing of metal parts on rusted out hulks which are really just a "data plate" with a license plate.

I think this topic may have no definitive or definite answer and each individual case would be subject to the judgement of whoever or whatever agency (DMV, CHP, insurance adjuster) was looking at it.

I'm just brainstorming and wanted to spark a discussion here and draw on the vast bank of P-knowlege that is the Pelican board. Thanks all!

[ossiblue]

You are right, this same issue has been discussed many times before, and there has been no definitive answer. But to some of the questions you raised, IMO, you've answered them by the fact that you've raised them.

"So why not cut a portion of the 73 front clip/dash/a pillar out and weld it into the 87 carrera tub? Now for some reason we are "tampering". Where have we gone wrong? Is it in the intent? Is it in the % of how much of the original titled car is left? Is it in the definition of what "is" is?"

It is indeed the intent, that's why there are such strict laws against tampering. There's probably is no legally defined "line" where % of metal must remain but swapping vin's, which is what you are describing regardless of the amount of metal surrounding the number, is what this is all about. It's about what a "reasonable person" would consider as the intent, regardless of the hair-splitting on amount of metal cut or what "is" is. That will be the DMV's point of view, and it will be up to you to prove it is not a VIN swap. We, on this board, are free to disagree on where restoration ends and VIN swapping begins, but at the end of the day, you will be dealing with the DMV and they don't need to ascribe to "innocent until proved guilty."

"Grady, your scenario seems plausible but at what point are you just creating way too much work for yourself?"

Again, this question contains the answer. Once you deem the project as creating too much work and begin to consider just a VIN swap, you've shown your intent. A VIN swap is much easier, that's why its illegal. Of course most of us would choose to do that if it was legal and there were clearly defined rules on when restoration becomes a VIN swap, but there isn't. The DMW will look at this as the U. S. Supreme Court Justice looked at pornography--"I can't tell you what it is, but I know it when I see it." As far as VIN tampering goes, I think we all know it when we see it--regardless of rationalizations.

[porschenut]

So, for the sake of arguement and entertainment, let's say I take a '73 911T and cut off the front clip (front accident damage and rusty), remove the floor pans and longitudinals (rusted out) and cut off the torsion housing to replace it with a G50 unit. And while we're at it remove the roof to get rid of the sunroof and drip rails. Is it still a 73 911T? I think most people would agree it is legally still a '73T.

Now what if I use my '87 Carrera tub for "parts" and replace all of the above onto what's left of the 73? So far we are "legal" and "moral" as long as there is documentation?

I'll add my perspective to the argument. If you take all that stuff off of the 73 T, and graft on the replacements from the '87, in my opinion it's still a 73 T as far as the VIN goes.

But the question is, how much of the chassis can you replace before it becomes the OTHER car? What if you cut both cars up into little pieces and then build one car out of the pile of shredded sheet metal without knowing which pieces came out of which car...which car did you build?

This leads me to look at the bigger picture - the law is just there to prevent dishonesty isn't it? As long as you give up title to one car and tell the state it's salvage, do they really care which one you keep? Will they even know? Who's going to go after you? How will they prove it? How will they even suspect that you might have done something illegal? All they need to know is that car A was repaired and car B is now salvage. They'll be perfectly happy with that, case closed. The little old lady behind the counter at the DMV doesn't care and wouldn't have any reason to suspect you did anything wrong. Just tell her you replaced a fender. She wouldn't even flinch.

[pwd72s]

I have some VERY strong feelings on this subject, but have been asked by a moderator to not express them.

I can say that I'd never consider buying a car that I suspected the VIN had been tampered with. This is a federal violation with severe penalties.

VIN tampering

[Aron in Toronto]

Interesting issue.

How do the replica, "kit car" builders get away with this issue? I always seem to see them advertised as "Titled as a 1957 Porsche" or some such description. Is it because most of the kits are built up from vintage VW pans? If so that still can't explain them being titled as a Porsche. Or is it possible that they are using state reassigned VINs?

[Grady Clay]

Great discussion.

Originally Posted by Aron in Toronto

Interesting issue.
How do the replica, "kit car" builders get away with this issue? I always seem to see them advertised as "Titled as a 1957 Porsche" or some such description. Is it because most of the kits are built up from vintage VW pans? If so that still can't explain them being titled as a Porsche. Or is it possible that they are using state reassigned VINs?

Aron,

If they keep the original Porsche VIN (cut from salvage), I suspect it is illegal in most states in the US. I think most use a State assigned VIN. There is a USA standard for this where the new VIN identifies the state. I suspect some kit suppliers are ‘manufacturers’ and the chassis comes with a Manufacturer’s Statement of Origin’ (MSO).

Originally Posted by TT Oversteer

…
Grady, your scenario seems plausible but at what point are you just creating way too much work for yourself? …

Yes, it is a lot of work.


As noted above, in our ‘hypothetical’ the ‘tampering’ path is to cut out the metal VIN and replace it with the other. Even worse, heat the metal, obliterate one VIN and stamp in the other VIN. Any reasonable person (including DMV and police) would find this illegal.

In fact I look for this (or anything even close) on every car I inspect. I don’t think any tamper has passed my eyeball (and light, mirrors, cameras and scope). I have seen a lot and they were ‘dealt with’ officially.


I agree with the ‘intent’ argument. That can be supported by turning in the title, document selling the remains to a salvage operator and carefully documenting the entire procedure.

I think critical to supporting the ‘intent’ argument is destroying the late VIN and officially canceling the title. I would not let the salvage operator have the VIN but stamp/paint the VIN and “Title canceled” on everything ’87 remaining.

Please correct me - - does an ’87 Carrera have the ’87 VIN stamped, etched or decaled on many of the parts of the car? If so, keeping documentation of the salvage and canceled title with the ‘73T car is important.

Another possible way to establish ‘intent’ might be to officially notify PCNA and PAG. Let them put the ‘repair’ information in the ‘CoA’ file for the cars. What +/- to this?


The ‘way too much work’ scenario starts to look OK and a normal process for the car you are trying to create. To create a non-sunroof LIGHTWEIGHT with updated engine, transmission and running gear by repairing a damaged (by rust) ’73 911T is perfectly reasonable. In fact this is a common occurrence. You are just doing the process the best possible by destroying another (later) car.


PS: I think the ’73 roof is the first to have improved reinforcements. I don’t know if they are the same as ’87. The ‘73 still has the mounting for the opening rear quarter windows but can also be fixed..

Best,
Grady

[boba]

Other than the CA smog issue.

It would be less work and less expense to start with a 964 and backdate it. You would have better tub, suspension, A/C, and the 3.6 drive train which could pass CA smog.

Do you just want to have a '73?

[Jagshund]

We might as well be arguing religion here. No one's mentioned rebodied BIW issues.

[ljowdy]

There isn't any argument on if it can be done. Yes, it can be done but,,,,It's a Felony in Calif.

Altering or Changing Vehicle Numbers
10750. (a) No person shall intentionally deface, destroy, or alter the motor number, other distinguishing number, or identification mark of a vehicle required or employed for registration purposes without written authorization from the department, nor shall any person place or stamp any serial, motor, or other number or mark upon a vehicle, except one assigned thereto by the department.

(b) This section does not prohibit the restoration by an owner of the original vehicle identification number when the restoration is authorized by the department, nor prevent any manufacturer from placing in the ordinary course of business numbers or marks upon new motor vehicles or new parts thereof.

Amended Ch. 824, Stats. 1970. Effective November 23, 1970.

[GaryR]

The problem with swapping VINS, even if you CAN get away with it and you tell the guy that buys the car 5 years from now is.. maybe he won't tell the next guy, or the next. All of a sudden the guy with the pristine 69 for sale for big $$ (that HE paid a lot for) finds out it's NOT a 69 at all!

[boba]

Here is the hypothetical, two cars sitting side by side. Over time you take parts off of one car and move them over to the other. You take good sheet metal from one to replace rusted sheet metal on the other. In the end there are two cars sitting next to each other and the VIN's are where they were when the process started. In one spot you have a running operating car in the other you have a pile of rusty parts around the VIN # that was in the same spot it started.

Did you alter the VIN?

I bet the opinions are strong on both sides.

[TT Oversteer]

I think everyone agrees that it is illegal to alter a VIN especially with the intent to defraud or mislead, or to remove evidence from stolen property. That is not what I am discussing here.

The philosophical question at hand is what constitutes an original vehicle identification? If I legally own two cars I should be able to cut out as much of my 73 as I want and weld as much of my 87 onto it as I desire.

If my 73 is destroyed to the point where the only recognizable part remaining is the section of metal where the VIN is stamped, is it still a car? Can I then rebuild it using 99% of another car that I legally own? Does the donor car have to legally cease to be a "car" and then become a salvage titled collection of parts for me to then cut out its VIN plate and weld what's left around my '73 VIN plate? Again, have I "altered" the VIN of the '87 or have I merely attached the salvaged '87 to my repaired '73?

In the end if nothing was stolen and there was no intent to defraud, have I "altered" a VIN or committed a felony?

Again, in reality, probably no real answer. As far as the lady at the DMV knows your slant nose 930 is a perfectly legit 1969 911T. When I brought my '77 to the DMV from out of state for a VIN verification the lady looked at the stamped VIN placard on the A pillar, filled out the paperwork and issued plates. She had no idea even where to look for a number until I pointed it out to her.