Cars and Bids and VIN fraud

[JST]

https://carsandbids.com/auctions/3BeLZn26/2008-volkswagen-r32-scirocco-conversion

This thing has been all over social media recently—a Gen III Scirocco with a2008 R32 driveline swap, modded (for some reason) to give 550 hp.

It’s for sale now on Cars and Bids, where Doug DuMuro personally reviewed it.

Weirdly, it’s titled as a 2008 R32, and it’s had some sort of Texas VIN swap to reassign the donor cars VIN to the Scirocco. Obviously the Scirocco model was never imported here and hasn’t been federalized, so this is the work-around that someone came up with.

It shouldn’t bother me as much as it does, but it really does. Especially coming from DeMuro, whose whole folksy homespun schtick is that he’s just a happy go lucky Everyman Car Enthusiast. It’s especially irritating since DeMuro himself once wrote a big explainer about the ways people illegally import cars—including VIN swaps.

https://jalopnik.com/here-s-how-people-illegally-import-cars-to-the-united-s-1685247358

In fact, I challenge you to go back and re-read that Jalopnik piece and square it with the mealy mouthed bullshit in the Cars and Bids description about how this car came to be here. It’s almost like 2023 Doug has discovered something that 2015 Doug didn’t realize—illegally importing cars is dangerous and stupid but can also be very lucrative.

[SARAFIL]

Wow, this one is sketchy. And you apparently upset a lot of the fans with your questioning based on the comments.

Seems like this one would be more straightforward with a body-on-frame…. Ex. Bolt off the R32 body but keep the frame & drivetrain, and then drop the Scirocco body on it. But clearly not that easy on a unibody. Not interested enough in this car to watch the videos on how it was made but I agree with your logic that while this probably got by the Texas standards to assign a title, it is probably not compliant with DOT/NHTSA requirements to be roadworthy.

[JST]

I think the descriptions of the build process are taking some liberties. This seems like mostly a straight up driveline swap, though it sounds like it also involved some work at the back to make the AWD and subframe fit.

[Jeff_DML]

I think the descriptions of the build process are taking some liberties. This seems like mostly a straight up driveline swap, though it sounds like it also involved some work at the back to make the AWD and subframe fit.

Yeah was there ever an awd Scirocco?

[JST]

Later, I think there was a Scirocco R that used the Golf VI bits. But that’s not this.

[JST]

Ah, I guess the Scirocco R was FWD


https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a4694/features-web-originals-family-reunion-vw-scirocco-r-meets-its-elders/

[nate]

It would be kind of hilarious if this car got seized by the NHTSA before the auction ended.

Someone email them the auction link...."I'm thinking of buying this car, is it legal?" :lol:

[JST]

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/news/a15716/supercar-scirocco/

This contemporary review of this very car suggests it’s nothing more than a driveline swap, and that the builder intended to sell these are “essentially” kit cars. It seems like the description has shifted over time to accommodate the need to claim this is a 2008 R32 that’s been “rebodied” whatever the fuck that means.

Did they only make one because it turned out to be a lot harder to register than they thought? Or was it just because there wasn’t anyone else that wanted to drop 100+ grand on a modded Scirocco of dubious legality? Hard to say.

[robg]

I watched his review and he kind of mentioned the whole vin swap thing and I remember thinking “if I were the owner of this car I would not be advertising this on a major YouTube channel”. It sounds sketchy at best and I expect it will attract scrutiny. I’m also surprised that DeMuro is cool with listing this on his auction site.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dan]

This thing has been all over social media recently

We clearly don’t follow the same accounts/algorithms :lol:

[JST]

lol maybe not, but I’ve seen it on Twitter, FB, and Insta. It’s everywhere.

I think I understand the claim being made here. In a 2002 (?) Interpretation letter, the office of chief counsel clarified in the context of Land Rovers that simply replacing an old “body” with a new one on an old chassis wouldn’t constitute manufacturing of a new vehicle so long as the vehicle remained registered and titled as the prior year; the truck would remain eligible for 25 year rule import. See https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/23894ztv.

The problem is that the chief counsel later clarified that there are limits on this principle. See eg https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/16-000745-twisted-restorations-revised

Of course, famously in 2013 the agency cracked down on this practice and crushed a number of cars.

Whether this car ever really qualified as a “body swap” under a good faith interpretation of the NHTSA guidance is seriously dubious. But it’s pretty clear that whatever cover that fig leaf might have offered in 2010 isn’t there anymore.

[robg]

lol maybe not, but I’ve seen it on Twitter, FB, and Insta. It’s everywhere.

I think I understand the claim being made here. In a 2002 (?) Interpretation letter, the office of chief counsel clarified in the context of Land Rovers that simply replacing an old “body” with a new one on an old chassis wouldn’t constitute manufacturing of a new vehicle so long as the vehicle remained registered and titled as the prior year; the truck would remain eligible for 25 year rule import. See https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/23894ztv.

The problem is that the chief counsel later clarified that there are limits on this principle. See eg https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/16-000745-twisted-restorations-revised

Of course, famously in 2013 the agency cracked down on this practice and crushed a number of cars.

Whether this car ever really qualified as a “body swap” under a good faith interpretation of the NHTSA guidance is seriously dubious. But it’s pretty clear that whatever cover that fig leaf might have offered in 2010 isn’t there anymore.

Right- and a high profile car like this VW would be perfect car for NHTSA to make an example of.

[kognito]

I can't remember my VWVortex log in, wonder what is thought about this car over there

[John V]

My understanding (right or wrong) has been that body modifications are fair game (i.e. doing a "rebody," even if that is exceedingly difficult on a unibody car). But as soon as the VIN tags get removed and replaced, you've entered the shady/illegal area.

There's no way this car was a rebody. It's been VIN-swapped. And yeah, just add this to the already very-long list of things that make Doug completely unwatchable.

[ZBB]

lol maybe not, but I’ve seen it on Twitter, FB, and Insta. It’s everywhere.

I saw an ad photo for an article about it while reading the Jakopnik article you linked :lol:

[Josh (PA)]

While I understand the legal sketchiness of the car, I have to say the swap / execution is kind of cool. I've had a soft spot for Sciroccos ever since 1993 in college. My next door neighbor in my freshman dorm was Todd Holbert, the son of the late, great Al Holbert, who raced Porsches at Indy, LeMans, etc. Todd had a first gen Scirocco, and he had a lot of his Dad's driving skills. He used to take me for rides on the back roads outside Lehigh and scare the absolute shit out of me. It was one of those top 5 things that got me into cars.

[FC]

Jumping in way late here, but I find it astonishing that those folks are using the term "vin swapping' nonchalantly. That sounds spectacularly illegal at face value. It undermines the entire purpose of applying VINs in the first place.

I would need an official letter with fancy seals on it before even considering this purchase. Otherwise I would be taking a huge gamble that at any point it could be seized and crushed.

But even if you take the massive gamble to buy it and register and somehow manage to fly under the radar, I cannot imagine ever wanting to expose its existence again by selling it publicly. You might as well treat it like possessing stolen art.

Crazy.

[JST]

If I’m being honest, I think the chance of enforcement activity against this car is relatively low — it’s sketchy as hell but unlike some of the Land Rovers, Minis, and GT-Rs that the feds have moved against, it’s apparently a ten year old one-off and it doesn’t appear that HPA is trying to sell any more (and I have my suspicions about why that is).

Still, it’s a risk. And it’s a risk from an insurance standpoint, too—I don’t know how you insure this thing. As the Golf it’s clearly not but is registered as? As some sort of declared-value collectible? Is applying for insurance using the Golf VIN a separate act of fraud? What happens when/if you have to make a claim? What happens if you’re in a bad accident and your passenger or someone you hit sues you for driving a vehicle that was illegally imported and doesn’t meet FMVSS for basically anything?

My guess is your insurance company makes a beeline for the exit at that point. Hope you can afford to hire a lawyer and pay that seven figure judgment.

The original owner of this car parked it nine years ago and has driven it a total of 3800 miles. I have my suspicions about why the car went into storage in 2014ish, too (see the above 2013 enforcement actions), but who knows. He spent a lot of coin to play Russian Roulette with the feds. Hope those 3800 miles were worth it.

And Josh in PA, I have a soft spot for Gen I and Gen II Sciroccos, too. And Corrados, even. A buddy in HS had a 16V Scirocco and to this day I think that was just an unreasonably cool car.

The Gen IIIs, though? They never did anything for me. They look like Golfs that have been stepped on. They’re sort of interesting but I don’t see why you wouldn’t just buy a Golf, unless you were looking to be King of VW Vortex.

[nate]

If I’m being honest, I think the chance of enforcement activity against this car is relatively low — it’s sketchy as hell but unlike some of the Land Rovers, Minis, and GT-Rs that the feds have moved against, it’s apparently a ten year old one-off and it doesn’t appear that HPA is trying to sell any more (and I have my suspicions about why that is).

Still, it’s a risk. And it’s a risk from an insurance standpoint, too—I don’t know how you insure this thing. As the Golf it’s clearly not but is registered as? As some sort of declared-value collectible? Is applying for insurance using the Golf VIN a separate act of fraud? What happens when/if you have to make a claim? What happens if you’re in a bad accident and your passenger or someone you hit sues you for driving a vehicle that was illegally imported and doesn’t meet FMVSS for basically anything?

My guess is your insurance company makes a beeline for the exit at that point. Hope you can afford to hire a lawyer and pay that seven figure judgment.

The original owner of this car parked it nine years ago and has driven it a total of 3800 miles. I have my suspicions about why the car went into storage in 2014ish, too (see the above 2013 enforcement actions), but who knows. He spent a lot of coin to play Russian Roulette with the feds. Hope those 3800 miles were worth it.

And Josh in PA, I have a soft spot for Gen I and Gen II Sciroccos, too. And Corrados, even. A buddy in HS had a 16V Scirocco and to this day I think that was just an unreasonably cool car.

The Gen IIIs, though? They never did anything for me. They look like Golfs that have been stepped on. They’re sort of interesting but I don’t see why you wouldn’t just buy a Golf, unless you were looking to be King of VW Vortex.

Issue spotting like it's a law school exam lol.

[robg]

If I’m being honest, I think the chance of enforcement activity against this car is relatively low — it’s sketchy as hell but unlike some of the Land Rovers, Minis, and GT-Rs that the feds have moved against, it’s apparently a ten year old one-off and it doesn’t appear that HPA is trying to sell any more (and I have my suspicions about why that is).

Still, it’s a risk. And it’s a risk from an insurance standpoint, too—I don’t know how you insure this thing. As the Golf it’s clearly not but is registered as? As some sort of declared-value collectible? Is applying for insurance using the Golf VIN a separate act of fraud? What happens when/if you have to make a claim? What happens if you’re in a bad accident and your passenger or someone you hit sues you for driving a vehicle that was illegally imported and doesn’t meet FMVSS for basically anything?

My guess is your insurance company makes a beeline for the exit at that point. Hope you can afford to hire a lawyer and pay that seven figure judgment.

The original owner of this car parked it nine years ago and has driven it a total of 3800 miles. I have my suspicions about why the car went into storage in 2014ish, too (see the above 2013 enforcement actions), but who knows. He spent a lot of coin to play Russian Roulette with the feds. Hope those 3800 miles were worth it.

And Josh in PA, I have a soft spot for Gen I and Gen II Sciroccos, too. And Corrados, even. A buddy in HS had a 16V Scirocco and to this day I think that was just an unreasonably cool car.

The Gen IIIs, though? They never did anything for me. They look like Golfs that have been stepped on. They’re sort of interesting but I don’t see why you wouldn’t just buy a Golf, unless you were looking to be King of VW Vortex.

Great points. Maybe that's why the original owner is trying to get rid of this thing! If something bad does come to pass with this car would the buyer have grounds to sue Cars & Bids as well or are they somehow protected?

Yeah- i wanted a Corrado so badly in high school. Still think they're cool whenever i see one

[JST]

The liability that C&B might have here is kind of fascinating. It involves questions well beyond my area of practice, but I would certainly expect that a buyer would go after C&B if something happened to the car. After all, they’ve got deep, Carrera GT level pockets now.

I’m sure they’d argue they’re not liable for descriptions provided by the seller, and they’d likely be right. The fact that Doug recorded a video, though…that might be a whole different ballgame.

[lemming]

The liability that C&B might have here is kind of fascinating. It involves questions well beyond my area of practice, but I would certainly expect that a buyer would go after C&B if something happened to the car. After all, they’ve got deep, Carrera GT level pockets now.

I’m sure they’d argue they’re not liable for descriptions provided by the seller, and they’d likely be right. The fact that Doug recorded a video, though…that might be a whole different ballgame.

Your sarcasm is prompting me to pay attention and to pay attention to this.

:lol:

Now i want to know what this is about.

[JST]

I’m not super up on state consumer protection laws and what kind of cause of action they might give you against an online seller, or how effective their (very limited) disclaimer might be.

As a very general matter, if you’re an interactive computer service provider, federal law prevents you from being treated as the publisher of information provided by a third party. This is Section 230 that everyone has been talking about recently. An exception to that rule (broadly) is if you actively contribute to the creation of the content—and of course, you remain liable for any content you yourself create.

Is there liability here? Honestly don’t know, it’s a complex set of facts. Maybe not. But the easiest defense most online sellers have is significantly complicated here by what C&B did to market the car.

[John V]

I'm in the "couldn't really care less" boat with these auction sites and questionable cars. I'm not their target market.

And anyway, cars and bids has a long way to go before they catch up to the sketchiness that BaT already has engaged in.

[JST]

These auction sites are all terrible, though in the past both BaT and C&B have at least pulled the more obviously fraudulent auctions.

They really hate me over there. People don’t like to be reminded when they’re committing crimes.

[John V]

They (BaT, no idea about C&B) have also let a pile of obviously fraudulent auctions complete :dunno:

[JST]

Fair point. They’re still entertaining in the sense that I see cars there I haven’t thought about in years (or in some cases have never heard of), but it’s clear that buying anything on those sites is pretty foolish, unless you’ve had a chance to actually see the car and do due diligence on it yourself.

[SCA]

it’s clear that buying anything on those sites is pretty foolish, unless you’ve had a chance to actually see the car and do due diligence on it yourself.

As someone that has purchased three vehicles on BaT, I cannot disagree. We got burned on one of the three, ‘04 330Ci vert.

[SARAFIL]

I agree they are great to watch and see some cool, rare, unique or just odd cars you’re completely forgotten about. Seems like some sellers put in the effort to present the cars well and are very transparent, while others are far from that.