Wide hip Cobras clearly lend themselves to a loss of consortium claim.:cool:

His response was a smarmy, over-generalized list of what he feels are typical scenarios in legal proceedings. Specifically, it contributed nothing to my original query. I also don't appreciate being labeled a prostitute. My clients deserve thorough investigations. A discussion group may be an out of the box approach but every little bit helps. I have gained very useful info by following some of what has been written by other posters.

I disagree. What you describe is closer to pain and suffering. Loss of use is physical. You can measure it. Pleasure derived from looking at a car in a garage has no measurable value. It has emotional value only.

Hi Bill, The inner workings of who promised whom, storage issues, etc. aren't my concern. BTW, the car was not inoperable from 1980 to 2018. During that time period it had a spun bearing repaired and was given a paint job.

The adverse party is alleging that this car, in good working order, wasn't worth nearly as much as either a raced Cobra, a wide hip or a 289. This is what I'm either going to agree with or dispute. From what I have learned from various sources, raced cars (289s) may be worth a little more, wide-hipped models are not worth more and non-raced 289s are worth less.

Would you feel the same about a million-dollar Rembrandt that was lost in a theft? We'll see what a judge or jury says and I will be glad to share their ruling. Pain and suffering is a stretch but I will mention it to the attorneys.

Exactly my point about a garage queen.

If a Rembrandt disappears from a museum all that can be claimed for loss of use is unrealized revenue from traffic that didn't come to the museum because the Rembrandt is no longer there.

However, if the Rembrandt were in a sealed vault in the basement of a collector, and the painting is stolen and moved to another sealed vault, there is no real measurable loss of use because there was never any measurable revenue producing use. Mental pleasure, yes.

Oh, and it was mentioned that this was not operable? How "inoperable" was it? If it couldn't be driven there is even less of a case for use. And since all she ever had was a piece of paper discovered years later, there is even less of a nexus to be able to claim use that could be lost.

This whole thing sounds to me like it is being built on a house of cards by a bunch of lawyers that took a case on contengency. Sure hope you're submitting billable hours weekly.

A car raced vs a car not raced, in original Cobra circles depends on where it was raced, who sponsored the car, and who the drivers were. Additionally, where the car(s) in question finished in those races. Then we can go for the originality of the car, and all of it's components. Repaints can hurt the value of the car, missing major original components can and due hurt the value of a car not raced. Originality is key when it comes to the top value of a car with no race history, as the car in question apparently is. Is the original date coded, drivetrain intact? What about all the minor items like hoses, belts, dated hose clamps, suspension pieces, etc and so forth? What about the repaint, was the car stripped to bare metal and properly prepped and repainted, yup, you guessed it, another ding to the valuation of the car. Modifications from stock, another ding in valuation. As stated earlier, each car is valued on it's own, against itself, so using any other car for a valuation of what is, or what is not, is like asking what shade of blue the sky is over my head vs over your head, 100's, if not 1,000's of miles away from each other. So far, I've yet to see anything that can quantify the value of the car in question, at the time it was placed into storage, vs the cars value now, which quite frankly, appears to be the only real motivation of you as the poster, to get involved. Are you an interested 3rd party in the case for one side or the other? Or perhaps just a keyboard jockey hoping to "break the case wide open with your skills of deduction" using what is posted here by others as your "own exhaustive research". No offense, but those of us who have been around here for the last 20+ years, have seen it before.

So, value now, vs value then, and whether there was a verbal agreement to store the car for a set time period, at which time, if a fee was not paid, or another term between the two brothers was not met, the car could be sold. Or again, perhaps the idea of a duplicate title being presented to the brother of the old owner is the nail on the head. As time goes by, memories become foggy, and items thought to be fact, may not always be the case. Fast forward to now, and greed has sadly thrown into the mix....Greed and someone, perhaps a relative, guiding the wife of the dearly departed down a path that she should never have followed. He said, she said, they said, all irrelevant as the husband has departed this world, and any conversations he had with his brother are now consider hearsay, unless of course there is something in writing that you failed to previously mention. Again, all for the courts and attorneys to opine , all while billing their clients with glee.

Bill S.

The Rembrandt was on your living room wall.

Your insult aside, I am not getting paid for this. The attorneys are a different matter but they aren't here asking for help, I am. Thanks.

Yeah, Bill... we need some more couth around here.:cool:

Y'know, in most forums it is I who is offering advice to car owners. This time it was me looking for advice from y'all. Interesting experience....

There is loss in the theft. But there is no loss other than joy. Emotions have no value in the open market. I have never heard of a civil case of the theft of a major collectible where damages are claimed for "loss of joy".

Loss of Joy would certainly be quantifiable in my estimation. It may be a simple matter of semantics between, Loss of Use, Loss of Joy and Pain & Suffering. Glad I'm not a judge.

We are all being far too nice and accommodating to Mr. StLucie. If he were gathering information to review and base an opinion on he would gather information. This guy just picks up information offered and argues about it. We have newbies that are not as f'd up as this guy.

I think it is time to offer him an information (and dialog) embargo and simply ignore his future posts.

So if I follow this correctly now, someone is seeking financial compensation for loss of use of a car that hasn't been used in 30+ years? Interesting way to seek a payday. Loss compensation for a car that perhaps was sold out from under them without their knowledge? Absolutely. Loss of use compensation for a car that was in remote storage so long that it was apparently forgotten about to the point that the (perhaps improper) sale of said car wasn't noticed until long after the fact?? Hmmmmmm..... tough sell on that one.

No insult at all, my comment on greed comes from the old saying "greed makes good people do bad things". Since you have never fully stated here that you are a curious bystander, nor have you offered full disclosure as to your participation in the matter at hand, or what "other forum" is having a discussion on the car in question, your posts here remain "suspect" at that very least.

You have already shown you can dish it out, we expect you to be able to take it in return.

Of course, with that said, care to post the link to the "other forum" where this discussion appears to have brought you here for better information, and/or clarification as to what constitutes value ad, or value deduction in the case of a "non operable" car, stuck into storage, then sold, by the brother of the owner who may or may not have had a duplicate title to the car from the old owner, under what you consider questionable circumstances?


Bueller, Bueller, Bueller ;)


Bill S.

Oh you mean like asking for credentials?

I haven't done research in any other forum and (without looking through all of my posts) I don't believe I ever wrote that. I wrote that much of what I have learned from this river of information has led me down other tributaries of knowledge. For all of the help that I have received, my sincerest thanks.

As to my motives...all I asked when I came aboard was whether the 289s are considered more "historically significant than the 427s, whether raced cars were considered far more valuable and how the members felt about wide hip Cobras being more desirable than narrow hip Cobras. These things are being alleged by the adverse party.

My previous foray into this group was to ask whether anyone has heard of a Cobra being available to rent.

I really don't get the mean girl mob mentality that sometimes crops up on forums. Not really referring to any one person in particular but more of a general group direction some of these threads tend to adopt. Most here are good guys that I genuinely like and respect for their knowledge and character (even patrickt :LOL: ) But a person comes here respectfully and politely asking for information that is in abundance here and instead of happily discussing the cars we all love, it largely devolves into speculation about his motives and territorial attacks on his character. I believe in solidarity and sticking with the team and all that, but I just can't bring myself to be a part of that. I despise the term "bullying" - to me it implies weakness when used; but I can't think of a better word for what I see happening in this thread. Sorry guys - maybe it's just me - carry on. :MECOOL:

So then, I'll take it, a full disclosure from you, is not forthcoming?

With all of the assistance we have given to you so far, I'd think full disclosure, at this point in time, would be highly advisable. As it is clear to everyone here, you are more involved in this situation than you have lead us to believe.


Bill S.