Good luck!

[jpsmit]

Obviously if the owner of the car saw this it might be worth it but, 450 pounds, seriously? that seems like a lot to me.

[Tony Betts]

It might be worth it?

That's depends on how dodge you are.

As I say the paperwork is worthless, as the number belongs to the chassis. NOT the piece of paper.

BUT if you are the type who dont mind doing something dodgy? You all already now how to do it. Take a long wheel base chassis, worth perhaps £400 with no V5. shorten it. Stamp the 1923 number on it. And run to the dvla to register it.

Even if you only get an age related. What's it worth.

To those who dont know the differences on the various chassis, probably £2,500 for the chance to build an early car.

Surely if that's what you do, it's worth £450.00

MY WORDS OF WARNING, the law still hasn't changed on altering vin numbers. Modern or old. It's a maximum penalty of £2,000 and 3 years at her majestys pleasure.

And you might knacker the dvla up for us all AGAIN.

Tony.

Ps, keep an eye out in the future, there are 4 chassis coming up in a well known northern auction. 3 long 1 short. All without paperwork. The V5s are being sold separate. I'm sure they will be made known on the forum in time. BEWARE.

[Hedd_Jones]

LOL Tony.

I've seen the book, I made you aware of it last week as you may recall

For info. Car is not registered with DVLA. The Number is a 1923 Issue.

Chassis number is correct for date of first reg. Engine perhaps a tad later, still 1923 though. Neither currently on the A7 chassis register. That is also assuming there are no clerical errors (it is unusual to find an RF60 without at least 1).

I thought being a 2 seater is unusual for 1923, hence my message to you.

This is a continuation book issued in 1933 (which can be seen clearly in the ebay pics) when the car was 10 years old. 

May well explain slightly later engine and 2 seater status,

Indeed perhaps I could speculate the engine was supplied under warrenty!

Theres nothing whatsoever dodgy about the book in my mind. Nice piece of history

[Tony Betts]

hi hedd.

calm down.

as i told you on the phone, i dont make up cars with restamped chassis. and unknown paperwork. 

others are welcome to, and you are welcome to be one of them. you obviously see no problem with it.

if thats what gives the paperwork value for those who want to do so, fine. but i dont do that with my cars.

also as you know the document has, "lets say falts" im surprised you didnt hand this info onto your documents supplier.

the boulogne build in doing has a clear chassis number stamped, and no paperwork. part of the reason it was on the cheap side when i bought it. when the time comes ill get its age authenticated by the clubs rep as a 1925 car, and get an age related number. yes it might be worth more with a dodgy reg. but thats not what im doing.

the same with the 1923 car. unless more details arise on its ORIGINAL reg number.

to me its a piece of paper, has a small historical value. (thats because you have to do something ELEGAL with it to add value).

why didnt you buy it yourself for £450 ????

tony

[Hedd_Jones]

Tony.

I think you are getting confused. I have certainly not spoken to you on the phone about this logbook.

I messaged you here twice via PM. You replied to the first, but not the second.

At the time it was in the hands of a different party to the ebay seller.

The ebay seller of this is known to me. He is a dealer of all things automotive. Much as I believe you are?

Suggesting he is my "documents supplier" suggests impropriety which I think is out of order. I am more than happy to identify myself as his source of info.

As I noted, I believe its a very interesting historical artefact.

[Mike Costigan]

It is, indeed, an interesting artefact and one I would be pleased to see lodged in the Association Archives, but I cannot see that it has significant monetary value, certainly not of several hundred pounds.

[bystander]

Given that it is not even the original log book, but a 1933 (?) continuation, is it really THAT interesting, except for nefarious intent?

[Tony Griffiths]

If it was the original book issued with the car - and in clean condition - then there might be a tiny market for it and a few bidders interested. But a 1933 continuation? Barrel scraping comes to mind.