Erich,
I understand the importance of keeping certain construction practices
guarded to keep the frauds out there from selling their products to the
unsuspecting buyer. Unfortunately the reason for the TAC program in the
first place if I remember the discussions at the time was to protect buyers
from the frauds. This means that frauds were already taking place and still
are that I know of. As you point out, Shelby Mustangs have the same problem.
You asked, "Was the Tiger VIN tag removed from one relic and attached to the
other? Or did it stay in place and remain part of the car?" The front half
of the car is an original Tiger and the Tiger VIN and JAL tags remained
intact. If I remember correctly from the doors back was an Alpine. The
battery box was now behind the passenger seat. Whether he later removed the
box and moved the battery to the trunk I couldn't tell you. You are correct
in saying, "A salvage title is something the state does, I don't think a
volunteer organization should go anywhere near there." I am only saying that
if the TAC program does not already have the ability to do some kind of
checking on the history of the cars being TACed then maybe they should in
these times. The history of most cars can be had on the internet these days.
To bring up the added cost (not that you did but someone will)is not even an
issue when you think about the value of the car. If the car is found to be a
salvage then it should not qualify as a TAC candidate. It may still be of
Tiger heritage which is why I suggested it should qualify under a lessor
designation. I don't think our thoughts are all that far apart from reading
this last email. I have always supported the TAC program for those that want
it done, but the dear DR. has a good point. My concern is with the integrity
of the program and what it means to have a car TACed if a car like the one I
speak of could possibly pass based on some evidence it was a Tiger at one
time. BTW, I was already aware of Norms webpage but thanks to those that
sent me the link.
Dan
|