New York State - Department of Motor Vehicles - Passenger Vehicle Registration Renewal Stub 1955

[yannsaunders@gmail.com]

14 minutes ago, Bloo said:

I found an obituary for the older of the two Mr. Lockharts of Buffalo, and another for a woman who may have been his wife. Both died in 2016. The younger Mr Lockhart is likely alive and well, but probably too young to know anything about this firsthand.

 

Of course we have no idea if this Mr Lockhart is the Lockhart on the document, or if Lockhart on the document even existed. I guess that was a dead end.

 

Thanks, Bloo, for your continued interest in this "saga". At this rate I feel confident we will eventually solve the "mystery".
I honestly believe that incredible machine NEVER set foot (or tires) on US soil after 1937 and  before 1985.

 

All other opinions are welcome! 

[8E45E]

What I am led to believe from all this, is that thereis possibly ANOTHER 1937 Cadillac convertible running around with the exact same serial number. 

 

I am sure a search can be taken to see if any of the currently surviving 1937 Cadillac convertibles in all states and provinces (and possibly in Europe and Japan) have the same serial number as this one as there aren't all that many out there.

 

Craig

[alsancle]

On 10/21/2018 at 12:04 PM, Walt G said:

Al, re the coachwork not working well on the long chassis, if you removed the "cow catcher" train type front bumper the car would look entirely different, also if it were painted a dark color and used the chrome trim as an accent it would enhance the lines/styling. Remove the lights at the top of the front fenders as well. More isn't necessarily better when it comes to car styling. those lights may have been added later so the driver could tell where the fender was in relation to the wheels below and how much overhang he had in the front to deal with when driving.

 

Hey Walt,   I agree with your suggestions.  The other thing I was thinking was that the windshield isn't quite right.   I'm not negative on the car at all, it is quite impressive in person.  But it was also considered a shoe-in for BOS at Pebble this year and did not make winners circle.  It has all the right ingredients for that honor:  one off, established owner, great restoration,  unseen in original configuration for decades, etc.   But in person it just didn't quite live up to expectations.

[yannsaunders@gmail.com]

46 minutes ago, 8E45E said:

What I am led to believe from all this, is that thereis possibly ANOTHER 1937 Cadillac convertible running around with the exact same serial number. 

 

If that turns out to be true (but please allow me to doubt it very much) , then one of them obviously  has usurped the identity of the other.  Attached is a poor copy of the factory microfiche for 1937 Cadillac V16  chassis #5130328; that document is still available from "GM Historical" in Warren, MI.

 

IMHO, the theory of a 2nd car with the SAME serial number is too far off what I believe to be much simpler reality:  the document lists a FAKE DESCRIPTION AND VEHICLE ID on an otherwise authentic vehicle renewal stub from NY State.

[8E45E]

4 hours ago, yannsaunders@gmail.com said:

 

If that turns out to be true (but please allow me to doubt it very much) , then one of them obviously  has usurped the identity of the other. 

It still does not hurt to check and see if a second car with that identical serial number is by chance lurking around.  That way, you will nip any potential problems in the bud should it ever be re-imported and registered in North America.

 

Craig

[John348]

21 hours ago, mercer09 said:

There is no reason for that NY registration to not be authentic. Everything looks fine with exception to the low fee, as Bernie already mentioned.

Maybe it isnt 12 dollars, but 62 dollars? I dont know, as the fee should be around 25. for a full year and it is dated for January and doesnt mention being partial, which NY sometimes did. I have hundreds of those registrations here and that one is quite legit.

What would be the purpose of a forgery?

 

I am pretty sure NYS did partials through the 80's on non title vehicles. It was and still is very common to purchase a pre-1973 Vehicle in NYS with a signature on the transfer stub from someone who is not selling the vehicle. It was not exactly legal, but commonly known as an 'open reggie' It could take 45-60 days to get the registration card back that was transferable. 

There are so many variables to this scenario. It could have been sold as scrap, It was an 18 year old used car and there really was no value and appreciated by very few. . I strongly doubt that the registration was counterfeit, again why would anyone go through that trouble for an 18 year old car.

 

I must say it again, this story does have great potential entertainment value as a sequel to the John Karr reproduction parts stary on this site almost a year ago  http://forums.aaca.org/topic/289785-karr-rubber-manufacturing-california/ If you have not read that thread it was great! I know fellow forum poster "Grog" and my self were glued to it" 

 

Please keep this going, where is this car now? 

 

More realistic then counterfeiting a registration on a 18 year old car was it possible that someone took the paperwork and the numbers off of a scrap one to make a stolen one legitimate????? 

Edited October 23, 2018 by John348 (see edit history)

[Guest]

7 hours ago, 8E45E said:

What I am led to believe from all this, is that thereis possibly ANOTHER 1937 Cadillac convertible running around with the exact same serial number. 

 

I am sure a search can be taken to see if any of the currently surviving 1937 Cadillac convertibles in all states and provinces (and possibly in Europe and Japan) have the same serial number as this one as there aren't all that many out there.

 

Craig

Yann, as a former owner of two lowly V8 1931 Cadillacs and CLC member, I was previously aware of ( and in awe ) your expertise and long experience with V16 Cadillacs. Certainly you are familiar with the instances of 1930 V8  roadster bodies being installed on sedan chassis. In a few cases, my understanding is that fake ID tags were made and the engine restamped  using the numbers of a real roadster, resulting in two cars with the same numbers. It's hard for me to believe that such things would have gone on back in 1955 when V16's had comparatively little value. Nevertheless, perhaps Mr Lockhart was in possession of a 1937 Cadillac needing paperwork - perhaps some type of project car. He might have somehow known that the "real" car with that ID number had gone to Europe years before, and that was why he chose to use that particular number for his car - little chance of any problems.  Pure conjecture of course. Good luck, and thanks for sharing this most interesting story.

Edited October 23, 2018 by Guest (see edit history)

[yannsaunders@gmail.com]

2 hours ago, 8E45E said:

It still does not hurt to check and see if a second car with that identical serial number is by chance lurking around. 

 

Thanks for the suggestion, Craig. Right now I don't have time to start looking for an identical 1937 V16.

In 1937, only 50 such V16s were built; ALL of their VIN's are accounted for, one way or another.

 

If anyone wants to tackle Craig's recommendation about finding another 1937 V16 with VIN 5130328, pls. let me know?  

[yannsaunders@gmail.com]

54 minutes ago, Penske PC-7 said:

Yann, as a former owner of two lowly V8 1931 Cadillacs and CLC member, I was previously aware of ( and in awe ) your expertise and long experience with V16 Cadillacs. Certainly you are familiar with the instances of 1930 V8  roadster bodies being installed on sedan chassis. In a few cases, my understanding is that fake ID tags were made and the engine restamped  using the numbers of a real roadster, resulting in two cars with the same numbers. It's hard for me to believe that such things would have gone on back in 1955 when V16's had comparatively little value. Nevertheless, perhaps Mr Lockhart was in possession of a 1937 Cadillac needing paperwork - perhaps some type of project car. He might have somehow known that the "real" car with that ID number had gone to Europe years before, and that was why he chose to use that particular number for his car - little chance of any problems.  Pure conjecture of course. Good luck, and thanks for sharing this most interesting story.

 

I like your approach, Püenske PC-7. Yes, I have done much research  on Cadillac styling, production and survival, starting at the age of 16 (I'm pushing 80 as we speak). Like you, I am aware of certain questionable "practices" among less-than-honest car collectors/dealers. In this instance, I tend to believe that the description (and VIN) for this car indeed WERE "borrowed" from an unscrupulous person who knew it to be extant and  thus (as you rightly point out), there was "little chance of any problems" deriving from the "made up" renewal stub.

 

Then again, since the car effectively returned to the USA from Switzerland and France, in 1985, perhaps the person who acquired it needed some "evidence" that it had either never left the USA or someone else had gone through proper import procedures 30 years or more beforehand.

 

Thanks again, and do keep the thread open.  

 

[yannsaunders@gmail.com]

2 hours ago, John348 said:

Please keep this going, where is this car now? 

The car spent the years 1990 to 2015 in the renowned Blackhawk Museum, in Danville, CA. It has been the object of quite a few articles in the press. I personally supplied the present owner (whose name need not appear here) with every known document and photo in my possession relating to it; I had the opportunity, in 1987, to talk to both the first owner (Philippe Barraud) and the coachbuilder (Willy Hartmann), both of Lausanne. I talked also - last year - to Philippe's daughter (Roxane) and his nephew (Daniel).

The information I gleaned about this car, especially whence I got the original sepia photos from 1937, enabled the new owner to restore it back to (almost) the original 1937 configuration ( I say "almost" because a few minor but useful modifications were wrought  during the restoration). It was shown at Pebble Beach last month and was greatly admired, although it conceded victory in the race for "Best of Show" to another 1937 classic car (an Alfa Romeo).

 

Please keep this going, where is this car now? 

[1935Packard]

12 hours ago, yannsaunders@gmail.com said:

 Much appreciated, thanks.

One question:

Would not the owner of the car have to  present the car to the licensing authorities "in person", to guarantee its physical existence?

 

Sure, Yann.  I'm also a Cadillac LaSalle guy, and I've long been appreciative of your awesome work on the history of these cars.  Just glad to be able to help.

 

I do't know how it works in terms of NY registration, though.  But maybe someday I'll find out what happened to that car.

[8E45E]

17 hours ago, John348 said:

 

I am pretty sure NYS did partials through the 80's on non title vehicles. It was and still is very common to purchase a pre-1973 Vehicle in NYS with a signature on the transfer stub from someone who is not selling the vehicle. It was not exactly legal, but commonly known as an 'open reggie' It could take 45-60 days to get the registration card back that was transferable. 

There are so many variables to this scenario. It could have been sold as scrap, It was an 18 year old used car and there really was no value and appreciated by very few. . I strongly doubt that the registration was counterfeit, again why would anyone go through that trouble for an 18 year old car.

 

I must say it again, this story does have great potential entertainment value as a sequel to the John Karr reproduction parts stary on this site almost a year ago  http://forums.aaca.org/topic/289785-karr-rubber-manufacturing-california/ If you have not read that thread it was great! I know fellow forum poster "Grog" and my self were glued to it" 

 

Please keep this going, where is this car now? 

 

More realistic then counterfeiting a registration on a 18 year old car was it possible that someone took the paperwork and the numbers off of a scrap one to make a stolen one legitimate????? 

Then you'll love this story:  http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?93782-Production-order-questions&highlight=production+order

 

Craig

[Modeleh]

Interesting story.  There have been comments made regarding why someone would create a forged registration in 1955?  Is it possible that the 1955 dated document was actually forged in 1985, which by this time the car had more historical significance and value?  Possibly it was a trick that a well connected collector car dealer had used successfully in the past to import vehicles that had no paperwork.

[1935Packard]

It just dawned on me that there are much better ways to find original New York registrations from the 1950s to compare this to originals: Ebay!  There are some1955 registration renewal stubs on ebay.  https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.A0.H0.TRS1&_nkw=new+york+1955+registration

 

Images of one: 

 

 

 

[Kevin M]

I agree that this may be a forgery from 1985. NYS didn’t issue titles before 1973 so those registration cards were your proof of ownership. If the car was to be registered in the states at that time I could see someone doing that to save them some trouble at the dmv.

Also I don’t think anyone has brought up the question of Mr Lockhart misreading the vin. Sometimes a 3 looks like an 8. I don’t think that’s too far fetched of an idea. 

[John348]

48 minutes ago, Kevin M said:

I agree that this may be a forgery from 1985. NYS didn’t issue titles before 1973 so those registration cards were your proof of ownership. If the car was to be registered in the states at that time I could see someone doing that to save them some trouble at the dmv.

Also I don’t think anyone has brought up the question of Mr Lockhart misreading the vin. Sometimes a 3 looks like an 8. I don’t think that’s too far fetched of an idea. 

 

Kevin,

I think NYS used engine numbers up until the late 50's. I think a good start is to find out what business Mr Lockhart was involved with if any.

[yannsaunders@gmail.com]

11 hours ago, 1935Packard said:

It just dawned on me that there are much better ways to find original New York registrations from the 1950s to compare this to originals: Ebay!  There are some1955 registration renewal stubs on ebay.  https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.A0.H0.TRS1&_nkw=new+york+1955+registration

 

Images of one: 

 

 

 

 

11 hours ago, 1935Packard said:

It just dawned on me that there are much better ways to find original New York registrations from the 1950s to compare this to originals: Ebay!  There are some1955 registration renewal stubs on ebay.  https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.A0.H0.TRS1&_nkw=new+york+1955+registration

 

Images of one: 

 

 

 

 

Now THAT is a good tip.
I found another such NY registration renewal stub, this one from a a 1956 Chevy.

I have used PhotoShop to make it look like the 1937 Cadillac stub we are discussing.

Isn't it possible that Mr. Lockhart had another year and model of car and whoever "worked" on the 1937 Cadillac simply got a copy of THAT registration stub and modified lines 5 through 12? 

 

[yannsaunders@gmail.com]

1 hour ago, Kevin M said:

I agree that this may be a forgery from 1985. NYS didn’t issue titles before 1973 so those registration cards were your proof of ownership. If the car was to be registered in the states at that time I could see someone doing that to save them some trouble at the dmv.

 

Also I don’t think anyone has brought up the question of Mr Lockhart misreading the vin. Sometimes a 3 looks like an 8. I don’t think that’s too far fetched of an idea. 

 

This is another interesting and plausible explanation WHY someone would create a forgery of Mr. Lockhart's  1955 renewal stub.

On the other hand, I don't think the VIN could have been misread; if either number "3" in that VIN (5130328) were changed to an "8" (5180828), the description of the car (1937 V16) would gave been "impossible".

All 50 of those 1937 V16s had a VIN starting with "51", as shown in this case. So ... the last 2 digits would have, of necessity, read from "01" to "50".  

[yannsaunders@gmail.com]

57 minutes ago, John348 said:

I think a good start is to find out what business Mr Lockhart was involved with if any.

 

That MIGHT help, John, but I'm too old to start that research.

Obviously, Lockhart had an interest in  classic cars ... but NOT necessarily in this 1937 V16 Cadillac.

IMHO, lines 5 to 12  of Mr. Lockhart's 1955 renewal stub have been forged.

Did he KNOW about that and condone it, well, that's another question.

[yannsaunders@gmail.com]

22 hours ago, Modeleh said:

Is it possible that the 1955 dated document was actually forged in 1985, which by this time the car had more historical significance and value?  Possibly it was a trick that a well connected collector car dealer had used successfully in the past to import vehicles that had no paperwork.

 That scenario matches more an more my own confirmed opinion, i.e. the registration stub was made to look as if the vehicle had been always registered in the State of NY. Such a "forgery" could have been only to import a US vehicle from Europe without paying any dues.

 

It must be possible to find out where and when the car was registered in Scottsdale (or Phoenix), in Arizona, during the first or second quarter, 1985. 

[ChazA]

On ‎10‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 7:49 AM, yannsaunders@gmail.com said:

 

Thanks, Bloo, for your continued interest in this "saga". At this rate I feel confident we will eventually solve the "mystery".
I honestly believe that incredible machine NEVER set foot (or tires) on US soil after 1937 and  before 1985.

 

All other opinions are welcome! 

Maybe the simple answer is yes, the car was sold, but never left.  Possibly the transport fell through to bring it back to the US.   Maybe if it wasn't drivable, they ran into issues, and eventually was sold back without the car ever even moving   From 55-59, after multiple attempts to transport, they just said forget it.  Chuck

Edited November 1, 2018 by ChazA (see edit history)

[yannsaunders@gmail.com]

5 hours ago, ChazA said:

Maybe the simple answer is yes, the car was sold, but never left.  Possibly the transport fell through to bring it back to the US.   Maybe if it wasn't drivable, they ran into issues, and eventually was sold back without the car ever even moving   From 55-59, after multiple attempts to transport, they just said forget it.  Chuck

 

Thanks Chaz; I agree that your explanations are perfectly plausible.