Specialist Cars of Malton enters administration... - Page 4 - Porsche General - PistonHeads UK

https://www.gazetteherald.co.uk/news/18463198.spec...

It's Abarth, not Arbarth - I don't belieeeeeeeeeeve it.

Desert Dragon said: Be Sothebys lads not Maltons Fixed that for you.

Very sad what happened there. Will stay in many people's memories for a while. The owner did not come across well when I called up on a 993 RS he was selling. I've seen some of his unsolicited emails too. Awful. Nothing really on the auction site of note just junk. Auction goes to show all you really have in any business is your reputation. Without this you're dead. Go above and beyond the ordinary OPC or Bentley sales service and you could have something very special in the current market as a fossil fuel car dealer. They're going to become like art dealers the good ones. Be Sothebys lads not Malton Edited by Desert Dragon on Friday 29th May 09:43

Thanks

that I did not expect

Orangecurry said: that I did not expect Everyone makes mistakes. Appreciate the nudge

Desert Dragon said: Very sad what happened there. Will stay in many people's memories for a while. The owner did not come across well when I called up on a 993 RS he was selling. I've seen some of his unsolicited emails too. Awful. Nothing really on the auction site of note just junk. Auction goes to show all you really have in any business is your reputation. Without this you're dead. Go above and beyond the ordinary OPC or Bentley sales service and you could have something very special in the current market as a fossil fuel car dealer. They're going to become like art dealers the good ones. Be Sothebys lads not Malton Edited by Desert Dragon on Friday 29th May 09:43 Do you have a li k for the auction site ? Cheers

Here you go https://onlinesales.walkersingleton.co.uk/m/view-a...

There’s an update been posted on 911uk of the murky dealings.

MrC986 said: There’s an update been posted on 911uk of the murky dealings. Just read that thread, what an eye opener! HUGE kudos to 911uk for hosting the thread too.

v8ksn said: MrC986 said: There’s an update been posted on 911uk of the murky dealings. Just read that thread, what an eye opener! HUGE kudos to 911uk for hosting the thread too. Can we have a link...?

http://911uk.com/viewtopic.php?t=139106

http://www.911uk.com/viewtopic.php?t=138220&po...

Is this still the same.company that used to organise the big breakfast meets every year?!

and http://www.911uk.com/viewtopic.php?p=1488234 and http://www.911uk.com/viewtopic.php?p=1532612

Apparently £6M has disappeared, absolutely shocking behaviour. Interesting list of creditors, some very close to home...

Wasn't there a fairly prolific poster here who was one of the "management team"? Don't think I've seen him post for a couple of years, mind.

v8ksn said: MrC986 said: There’s an update been posted on 911uk of the murky dealings. Just read that thread, what an eye opener! HUGE kudos to 911uk for hosting the thread too. Yup. The reason PH apparently don’t allow these threads is because of the liability....apparently 911 Uk have amazing legal advisors. Or maybe. PH cares more about the advertising than providing a service to the forum contributors...without whom PH wouldn’t exist.

Cheib said: v8ksn said: MrC986 said: There’s an update been posted on 911uk of the murky dealings. Just read that thread, what an eye opener! HUGE kudos to 911uk for hosting the thread too. Yup. The reason PH apparently don’t allow these threads is because of the liability....apparently 911 Uk have amazing legal advisors. Or maybe. PH cares more about the advertising than providing a service to the forum contributors...without whom PH wouldn’t exist. 911uk is a special forum that will stand up for people unlike others. I'm sure this scandal and others could have been exposed earlier without the catastrophic financial damage that some now have to live with if people had been allowed to speak out.

OpulentBob said: Wasn't there a fairly prolific poster here who was one of the "management team"? Don't think I've seen him post for a couple of years, mind. Was Mark, left SCOM a few years ago

It's seems there is literally no repercussions for this sort of crime.

gottans said: 911uk is a special forum that will stand up for people unlike others. I'm sure this scandal and others could have been exposed earlier without the catastrophic financial damage that some now have to live with if people had been allowed to speak out. There’s a recent update from a new poster about some extracurricular “servicing” that’s reportedly been going on, reports now of a criminal investigation and media enquiries via that forum. It’s sad that censorship by certain groups has possibly cost a good number of people their hard earned savings and it’s unfortunately tarnished established businesses located in the same area who work in the same industry.

Cheib said: v8ksn said: MrC986 said: There’s an update been posted on 911uk of the murky dealings. Just read that thread, what an eye opener! HUGE kudos to 911uk for hosting the thread too. Yup. The reason PH apparently don’t allow these threads is because of the liability....apparently 911 Uk have amazing legal advisors. Or maybe. PH cares more about the advertising than providing a service to the forum contributors...without whom PH wouldn’t exist. Very lazy I know, but can you précis it - Cheers

RSVP911 said: Very lazy I know, but can you précis it - Cheers SCoM - We can sell your car for you, we are premier dealers with a great reputation Owner - OK, I trust you, here is my Porker SC0M - Hey, would you like to buy this porker? It's a beauty! Customer - Yeah OK, here is a cheque SCoM - WooHoo! Spends money on god knows what Owner - Hey, is my car sold? SCoM - Silence..... Owner - Hey, is my car sold? SCoM - Err......no.....err..... ooh look, a rainbow

MrC986 said: gottans said: 911uk is a special forum that will stand up for people unlike others. I'm sure this scandal and others could have been exposed earlier without the catastrophic financial damage that some now have to live with if people had been allowed to speak out. There’s a recent update from a new poster about some extracurricular “servicing” that’s reportedly been going on, reports now of a criminal investigation and media enquiries via that forum. It’s sad that censorship by certain groups has possibly cost a good number of people their hard earned savings and it’s unfortunately tarnished established businesses located in the same area who work in the same industry. There are a few dealers who have sailed very close to the wind and customers who are out of pocket as a result, which [i[could[/i] have been prevented if name and shame rules on PH were not so one-sided. 911uk deserve real credit for the work they do in weeding out nonsense accusations, but allowing substantiated stories to air, in order for the greater good.

v8ksn said: RSVP911 said: Very lazy I know, but can you précis it - Cheers SCoM - We can sell your car for you, we are premier dealers with a great reputation Owner - OK, I trust you, here is my Porker SC0M - Hey, would you like to buy this porker? It's a beauty! Customer - Yeah OK, here is a cheque SCoM - WooHoo! Spends money on god knows what Owner - Hey, is my car sold? SCoM - Silence..... Owner - Hey, is my car sold? SCoM - Err......no.....err..... ooh look, a rainbow Thx

He won't even see prison. He knows this. Had a friend that had this happen to him with a flat/lawyer. Ran off with £330k. Law Society did nothing. Still practices through his childrens firm. Straight theft. No jail nothing.

Digga said: There are a few dealers who have sailed very close to the wind and customers who are out of pocket as a result, which [i[could[/i] have been prevented if name and shame rules on PH were not so one-sided. 911uk deserve real credit for the work they do in weeding out nonsense accusations, but allowing substantiated stories to air, in order for the greater good. Absolutely. Same with Coys, 911 UK were happy for people to post details of their experience. Very similar to SCoM it seems although they also did the dirty on a few dealers looking at their list of creditors.

Cheib said: Digga said: There are a few dealers who have sailed very close to the wind and customers who are out of pocket as a result, which [i[could[/i] have been prevented if name and shame rules on PH were not so one-sided. 911uk deserve real credit for the work they do in weeding out nonsense accusations, but allowing substantiated stories to air, in order for the greater good. Absolutely. Same with Coys, 911 UK were happy for people to post details of their experience. Very similar to SCoM it seems although they also did the dirty on a few dealers looking at their list of creditors. SCoM Gmund Yorkshire Classic Porsche All now gone, all previously the subject of very severe criticism on both 911uk and Pistonheads, but only the former allowed people's (verified) accounts to stand as warning to others. Not only does this enable the crooked to survive and inflict themselves on others, but it can also unfairly cast a pall of suspicion over even the best dealers, when it is hard to get genuine feedback and comment on any. There are many superb independent sales and service dealers out there who should never even have to be compared with the likes of these firms.

Digga said: Cheib said: Digga said: There are a few dealers who have sailed very close to the wind and customers who are out of pocket as a result, which [i[could[/i] have been prevented if name and shame rules on PH were not so one-sided. 911uk deserve real credit for the work they do in weeding out nonsense accusations, but allowing substantiated stories to air, in order for the greater good. Absolutely. Same with Coys, 911 UK were happy for people to post details of their experience. Very similar to SCoM it seems although they also did the dirty on a few dealers looking at their list of creditors. SCoM Gmund Yorkshire Classic Porsche All now gone, all previously the subject of very severe criticism on both 911uk and Pistonheads, but only the former allowed people's (verified) accounts to stand as warning to others. Not only does this enable the crooked to survive and inflict themselves on others, but it can also unfairly cast a pall of suspicion over even the best dealers, when it is hard to get genuine feedback and comment on any. There are many superb independent sales and service dealers out there who should never even have to be compared with the likes of these firms. Wasn’t Sean Lockyear another one that did similar

Re SL yes same thing happened. There will be others who liquidate through this period so be warned. This purge is a good thing for quality Porsche dealers IMO.

Yorkshire Classic Porsche - didn’t know they had gone. He was a thoroughly nasty man that had been ripping people off since day one. How he ever stayed calm enough to actually sell one of his nails to anyone always amazed me.

What is it with that Yorkshire/Bradford/Keighley "belt" that fills it with so many chancers, con-artists and scumbags? If i were a reputable dealer (don't laugh at the back), I'd make sure I moved 100 miles away from that area. As soon as that area, and cars, are mentioned in the same sentence, eyes start to roll. Edit for crap spelling

Malton is hardly Bradford/Keighley belt!

I'm surprised this thread hasn't been pulled (yet) A big.. . .to 911UK for trying to make us all aware of the rogues

Porsche guy said: I'm surprised this thread hasn't been pulled (yet) A big.. . .to 911UK for trying to make us all aware of the rogues All the firms discussed are now in various states of administration or liquidation and no longer trading, so the thread most definitely should not be pulled. Moreover, it should perhaps be noted that the prior threads which were pulled, might have served others as a warning, and saved them much grief. Which is sad.

yeah I'm also suprised this thread isn't pulled to protect Specialist Cars of Malton

OpulentBob said: What is it with that Yorkshire/Bradford/Keighley "belt" that fills it with so many chancers, con-artists and scumbags? If i were a reputable dealer (don't laugh at the back), I'd make sure I moved 100 miles away from that area. As soon as that area, and cars, are mentioned in the same sentence, eyes start to roll. Edit for crap spelling There are reputable and reliable dealers in Yorkshire that have been trading for many years

Upnorthgt3 said: There are reputable and reliable dealers in Yorkshire that have been trading for many years SCOM had a good reputation for many years,unfortunately for everyone concerned when his back was up against the wall he decided to play dirty...

CRA1G said: SCOM had a good reputation for many years,unfortunately for everyone concerned when his back was up against the wall he decided to play dirty... Yep, desperate people do desperate things. I just don't understand the mindset of people who do this though. I just cant fathom how someone can sell a car that does not belong to them and then just....fritter away the money. I don't even TOUCH someone else's car unless I am allowed by the owner never mind take the car and sell it and then lie about it. I just think its a purely evil thing to do.

v8ksn said: Yep, desperate people do desperate things. I just don't understand the mindset of people who do this though. I just cant fathom how someone can sell a car that does not belong to them and then just....fritter away the money. I don't even TOUCH someone else's car unless I am allowed by the owner never mind take the car and sell it and then lie about it. I just think its a purely evil thing to do. Like the old saying goes ‘Cuts one's coat according to one's cloth’ I think it’s simply because they have made money got used to a certain standard of living and then when it starts to go wrong they can’t finance that standard of living anymore yet they cannot or will not reduce that lifestyle...... and then they start using someone else’s assets to carry on funding it hoping the next big sale will carry on their cash flow ..... Slowly but surely it doesn’t and the further you go down that route over time the worse it becomes and you become more desperate and so do more and more desperate things. I I have a close friend who landed a £2 million two year contact last year to renovate a property, yet with minimal overheads and all his subbies are self employed so no wage bill if hasn’t work for them, yet he’s ‘struggling’. No he’s not, just that it won’t fund the lifestyle he’s enjoyed for the last few years because simply he takes too much money out of his business and there’s not the profit in it. The video I’ve seen of the owner of SCOM with the bailiffs there pointing out the Rolex on his wrist says it all...... Like the rest of his ilk they just can’t understand/ refuse to acknowledge they should reduce their lifestyle to suit. Edited by Wozy68 on Thursday 30th July 18:19

Wozy68 said: The video I’ve seen of the owner of SCOM with the bailiffs there pointing out the Rolex on his wrist says it all Edited by Wozy68 on Thursday 30th July 18:19 Do you have a link to it please?

This might be it https://youtu.be/SRLDWv1uSQ8 Or it may not!

Upnorthgt3 said: OpulentBob said: What is it with that Yorkshire/Bradford/Keighley "belt" that fills it with so many chancers, con-artists and scumbags? If i were a reputable dealer (don't laugh at the back), I'd make sure I moved 100 miles away from that area. As soon as that area, and cars, are mentioned in the same sentence, eyes start to roll. Edit for crap spelling There are reputable and reliable dealers in Yorkshire that have been trading for many years There are chancers and dodgy dealers all over the country. It just happens that the latest two were high profile and happened to be in Yorkshire and a few miles apart. We still have some excellent and well respected dealers. We also still have some iffy ones and not just independents! It’s not unique t9 this part of the world.

BertBert said: This might be it https://youtu.be/SRLDWv1uSQ8 Or it may not! That’s the one

There's an update on 911uk re the creditor's owed (& the administrator's update).

MrC986 said: There's an update on 911uk re the creditor's owed (& the administrator's update). I am assuming this is the link.... http://911uk.com/viewtopic.php?t=139106&postda... £8.5m....

[Image-only or quote-only post; no author-written text.] https://www.pistonheads.com/inc/images/yikes.gif

Paddy1970 - yep, you found it. It’s sad to see someone has reportedly lost over £1m during the events that took place with SCOM.

Hats off to 911uk for being the sole source of information regarding the trio of rogue Yorkshire Porsche dealers.

Digga said: Hats off to 911uk for being the sole source of information regarding the trio of rogue Yorkshire Porsche dealers. True, but every major forum had to be very careful. Nothing to gain from suing a small forum other than closing it down. Lots to gain from suing a well backed forum with money. Hence PH is risk averse; engaging lawyers is expensive even if it doesn't end up in court and the statements are true.

On BBC 1 The sheriffs are coming tonight there visiting a classic car dealer with a £100K writ..! Or maybe old footage...?

vaud said: Digga said: Hats off to 911uk for being the sole source of information regarding the trio of rogue Yorkshire Porsche dealers. True, but every major forum had to be very careful. Nothing to gain from suing a small forum other than closing it down. Lots to gain from suing a well backed forum with money. Hence PH is risk averse; engaging lawyers is expensive even if it doesn't end up in court and the statements are true. Totally, but at the same time, the paucity of real world (negative) reviews, allowed these firms to continue to rip customers off. What SCoM did was off the scale. in terms of financial magnitude and audacity, but they were all pretty sharp and operated in a similar vein for a long while before their respective times were called.

Digga said: Totally, but at the same time, the paucity of real world (negative) reviews, allowed these firms to continue to rip customers off. What SCoM did was off the scale. in terms of financial magnitude and audacity, but they were all pretty sharp and operated in a similar vein for a long while before their respective times were called. Unbelievable footage, the owner with an £8.5M hole in his finances, telling the debt collectors “I haven’t done this purposely” ... If that’s not complete self-denial of the fact he’s a lowest of the low common or garden con artist, I don’t what is. Disgraceful. Spot on Wozy, champagne tastes, lemonade money springs to mind.

It’s amazing that a company dealing in say £100k cars as an average has managed to run up those “debts”. I assume they’ve literally been selling cars they had on SoR and simply not paying the owner. I don’t get how they were allowed to able to do it for so long. Something very wrong with the legal system.

Cheib said: It’s amazing that a company dealing in say £100k cars as an average has managed to run up those “debts”. I assume they’ve literally been selling cars they had on SoR and simply not paying the owner. I don’t get how they were allowed to able to do it for so long. Something very wrong with the legal system. I agree, the magnitude of debt is extraordinary, given likely sums involved in individual transactions. As an aside, the whole SoR industry concerns me greatly. Having had a close shave with Yorkshire Classic Porsche, it has made me more diligent WRT checking the finances and balance sheets of firms I deal with personally . (This being a classic case of shoemaker's children, because commercially, it is something I've always done and have no idea why I never extended this to my own money.) The variance of companies finances never ceases to amaze - how 'small' firms can be extremely well capitalised and big names can be, well, running effectively on OPM.

A lot of interesting reading on 911UK - bravo to them for hosting that very worthwhile info. someone on 911UK said: I reiterate Ciaran's comments that Hawkins is an affable charming person. I spoke to him a couple of times over the years and always thought the same, which kind of proves the old saying: " but have you ever met a rude con man? " Also, I did always find it a bit strange that he had such a cosy relationship to that bloke that ended up in jail for wife beating (Keith something IIRC).

I'm surprised we're still allowed to keep talking about such things as the "fun police" seem to be cracking down more and more. 911uk seem to have bigger ba**s & are more amenable to sharing forum members pain as a consequence of questionable business practices & to try & prevent others from unwittingly falling for the sales spiel. The amounts some are reported to have lost is seriously shocking & I hope that justice is eventually achieved via the courts.

monthefish said: I spoke to him a couple of times over the years and always thought the same, which kind of proves the old saying: " but have you ever met a rude con man? " Really. I always found him arrogant and bit of a Bulls tter enough for me to walk away from cars he had in stock Also, I did always find it a bit strange that he had such a cosy relationship to that bloke that ended up in jail for wife beating (Keith something IIRC). Sambaman was a “Good Buddy” of Johns at one time .. they both made me cringe. Sambaman is no longer with us I believe

Redarress said: Sambaman was a “Good Buddy” of Johns at one time .. they both made me cringe. Sambaman is no longer with us I believe Discussed here: https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

monthefish said: A lot of interesting reading on 911UK - bravo to them for hosting that very worthwhile info. someone on 911UK said: I reiterate Ciaran's comments that Hawkins is an affable charming person. I spoke to him a couple of times over the years and always thought the same, which kind of proves the old saying: " but have you ever met a rude con man? " Also, I did always find it a bit strange that he had such a cosy relationship to that bloke that ended up in jail for wife beating (Keith something IIRC). Keith changed his cars more often than most of us change our underpants. He was “cosy” with a few “dealers”.

monthefish said: Also, I did always find it a bit strange that he had such a cosy relationship to that bloke that ended up in jail for wife beating (Keith something IIRC). I may be mistaken, but I thought that was obligatory in many parts of Yorkshire.

The commercial premises are up for sale now. Noticed earlier today.

supersport said: Keith changed his cars more often than most of us change our underpants. He was “cosy” with a few “dealers”. Wasn't he a dealer in his own right ? 911heaven and VWrelics ?

ChrisW. said: Wasn't he a dealer in his own right ? 911heaven and VWrelics ? Yes you are quite correct. I bought the ex “Trackaday”Guards 993 RS from Keith

FYI Specialist Cars of Malton has appeared on the list of deliberate tax defaulters published by Her Majesties Revenue and Customs earlier this year. From HM Gov: Specialist Cars of Malton Limited Sales of motor cars Formerly of Unit 22 Seph Way, York Road Industrial Estate, Malton, North Yorkshire, YO17 6AX 1 May 2016 to 31 Jul 2016 £200,772 £112,432.32 The first figure is the tax deliberately not paid, the second is the penalty. The date refers to when the default took place. No one likes paying taxes but its also the duty of every citizen to do so. The government can spend less, tax more or borrow it and that is all it can really do. It can print more money for a bit (and it has been) but then inflation rears its head and if you didn't live through the early 70s I wouldn't recommend it. It costs £800bn or so to run the United Kingdom for a non covid year in pensions and NHS and schools, army, navy, police etc and those that do pay their taxes end up having a bit higher tax to cover those that don't .

So is he in prison yet?

Paynewright said: So is he in prison yet? Far from it, word has it he's living it large and spending time in America..!

Funnily enough his old username Jonny Wishbone popped up in the finance section. Don’t think it’s him though, and his may have been spelt differently.

Just curious, it's a 3 month period, so presumably VAT or PAYE. I presume the former.

BertBert said: Just curious, it's a 3 month period, so presumably VAT or PAYE. I presume the former. Either way, you do not want to owe HMRC. About 10 years back, my parents were on their daily, pre-breakfast jog and saw a swarm of police and HMRC people waking up the owners of a house down the road form them. The couple ran a construction firm and, long story short, she was subsequently jailed for cooking the PAYE books.

We had a software business. One day about 3 days after the VAT was due there was a knock on the door. In essence they said the VAT had not been paid and the sent a man round. It had been paid ( VAT and Corp Tax combined ). He called the office, sorry sir and he was on his way. I was astonished they turned up at all - let alone so rapidly.

Jeremy-75qq8 said: We had a software business. One day about 3 days after the VAT was due there was a knock on the door. When was this out of interest? I helped a software business get sorted and they were a long way behind before anyone turned up from HMRC. And yes, they did get sorted out and paid off all the debts.

Hawkins is being sentenced at noon today in Bradford Crown Court. Pleaded guilty to all charges.

Steve800 said: Hawkins is being sentenced at noon today in Bradford Crown Court. Pleaded guilty to all charges. Wow... I thought that had all been done and finished...? What are the charges he's pleading guilty too...? I presume he was also made personally bankrupt after the administration...?

Any update regarding the sentencing?

Car dealer jailed for fraudulent trading Main article content Court results Published: 16:39 09/01/2026 The owner of a high-value sports car dealership has been jailed for fraudulent trading. John Patrick Hawkins, 66, was owner and director of Specialist Cars of Malton Ltd (SCML), and well-known in the business of trading expensive vehicles – Porsches in particular. But he now faces years behind bars, after SCML collapsed into liquidation, and an investigation by North Yorkshire Police uncovered his fraudulent efforts to keep the failing business afloat. Many of the customers deceived by Hawkins described knowing him for many years through their shared love of Porsches. Some even developed friendships, meeting for dinner and staying over at his house. In spite of that, Hawkins took advantage of them, leaving them £1.5 million out of pocket. SCML accounts analysed by North Yorkshire Police’s Economic Crime Unit showed trade had begun to slow down, with money received from customers doing no more than paying off an overdraft which was increasing year-on-year. Bradford Crown Court heard that Hawkins sought to keep the business going by raising money in several different ways – all of them dishonest. He would keep money he had received from selling vehicles given to him to sell on a ‘sale or return’ basis. On other occasions he sold vehicles being stored at SCML without the owners’ knowledge or agreement. He raised money by selling shares in vehicles he did not own. He obtained large sums of money advanced to him under finance agreements he was not entitled to enter into, and when confronted by customers wanting their money, he gave personal guarantees and assigned ownership of other vehicles he did not own as security. When SCML was placed into liquidation in February 2020, many customers had to take legal action to recover their interest in the vehicles that had passed through Hawkins’ hands. Some never received anything at all, including people who were relying on the sale of vehicles as part of their retirement plan. In one instance, a man whom Hawkins called one of his closest friends had to sell his belongings to avoid losing his house, having been persuaded to invest a substantial sum of money he never saw again. Hawkins was interviewed by North Yorkshire Police in August 2020. He provided a prepared statement saying that he had acted honestly throughout and had co-operated fully with the administrators – after which he answered “no comment” to investigators’ questions. But in court, Hawkins, of Coneysthorpe, Malton, pleaded guilty to fraudulent trading from late 2018 onwards, accepting that the total loss to those he deceived was £1.5 million. On 9 January 2026, he was sentenced to five years and three months in prison, and issued with a ten-year Directors Disqualification Order. A further hearing under the Proceeds of Crime Act is due to follow later this year for the confiscation of available assets. North Yorkshire Police fraud investigator Constable Emma Harris said: “In order to maintain the façade of a successful business, Hawkins lied to customers time and time again, and falsified documents to give credence to those lies. “The financial and emotional impact on his victims has been nothing short of devastating, and it is right that he now faces a lengthy prison sentence.”

5 years so out in ~3 years. Not great.

I'm sure that will be no holiday ... I wonder what will happen to Andrew Mearns ??

vaud said: 5 years so out in ~3 years. Not great. Guilty plea, so probable lighter sentence and struck off for 10 years rather than the maximum 15 years

ChrisW. said: I'm sure that will be no holiday ... I wonder what will happen to Andrew Mearns ?? Gets sentenced in February.

While he received over 5 years for defrauding victims of £1.5 million, you can receive up to 7 years for a single inflammatory social media post, which does raise questions about sentencing proportionality in the UK...

paddy1970 said: While he received over 5 years for defrauding victims of £1.5 million, you can receive up to 7 years for a single inflammatory social media post, which does raise questions about sentencing proportionality in the UK... Somewhat disingenuous post there, you conveniently omitted the impact of said post that was the reason for the lengthy imprisonment. Just a reminder of the whole story….. BBC News report

ChrisW. said: I'm sure that will be no holiday ... I wonder what will happen to Andrew Mearns ?? One would imagine similar sentence. We will find out by the end of February: https://www.harrogateadvertiser.co.uk/news/people/... I say this as the child of two Yorkshire parents, with family there, but Yorkshire does seem to make them! On a less serious note was the fabled Yorkshire Classic Porsche.

paddy1970 said: While he received over 5 years for defrauding victims of £1.5 million, you can receive up to 7 years for a single inflammatory social media post, which does raise questions about sentencing proportionality in the UK... You are absolutely correct. The man who incited riots and advocated mass murder should just have been told he was a naughty boy.

I know the legal system is slow, but how on earth can it take 6 years to get the case to court? Ironically costing a shed load of tax payers money to keep going. And whilst I have no sympathy for the man, having this hanging over your head for 6 years is a sentence in itself for most.

Orangecurry said: paddy1970 said: While he received over 5 years for defrauding victims of £1.5 million, you can receive up to 7 years for a single inflammatory social media post, which does raise questions about sentencing proportionality in the UK... You are absolutely correct. The man who incited riots and advocated mass murder should just have been told he was a naughty boy. Like Bobby Vylan was. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2025/dec/23/poli...

Digga said: ChrisW. said: I'm sure that will be no holiday ... I wonder what will happen to Andrew Mearns ?? One would imagine similar sentence. We will find out by the end of February: https://www.harrogateadvertiser.co.uk/news/people/... I say this as the child of two Yorkshire parents, with family there, but Yorkshire does seem to make them! On a less serious note was the fabled Yorkshire Classic Porsche. Don't forget Sean Lockyear.

mmhh my car is on SOR with a dealer at the moment and he has all the documentation incl. ownership doc for the car (I should have held on to that like I did last time). I guess the trust and hope for the best approach can go terribly wrong if you are unlucky. I did not even take my copy of the contract with the minimum price agreed.

supersport said: ChrisW. said: I'm sure that will be no holiday ... I wonder what will happen to Andrew Mearns ?? Gets sentenced in February. I’m waiting for that one; Mearns had my mates 911 and he was the last person to get his money back, very very lucky. I had tried to post the tale on PH who deleted it and sent me a snotty email; luckily the guy that runs 911uk let me and due to that post Mearn’s actually gave my mate the money from selling his car - about £55k or so. Some people lost a lot more.

MDL111 said: mmhh my car is on SOR with a dealer at the moment and he has all the documentation incl. ownership doc for the car (I should have held on to that like I did last time). I guess the trust and hope for the best approach can go terribly wrong if you are unlucky. I did not even take my copy of the contract with the minimum price agreed. Easy to see why people get "scammed" with very little comeback.

Dog Star said: supersport said: ChrisW. said: I'm sure that will be no holiday ... I wonder what will happen to Andrew Mearns ?? Gets sentenced in February. I m waiting for that one; Mearns had my mates 911 and he was the last person to get his money back, very very lucky. I had tried to post the tale on PH who deleted it and sent me a snotty email; luckily the guy that runs 911uk let me and due to that post Mearn s actually gave my mate the money from selling his car - about £55k or so. Some people lost a lot more. Same happened with YCP; they complained about posts people put up on both PH and 911uk. PH capitulated entered, whilst most of the objective stuff (sadly the post with the phone recording did not make that cut) survived and is still up there as fair warning. FWIW there are still dealers I’d implicitly trust with SOR. RPM Technik have sold cars for mates and I’ve bought two and sold one through JZM with zero hassle and excellent service. There are other good guys too, I’m sure.

paddy1970 said: While he received over 5 years for defrauding victims of £1.5 million, you can receive up to 7 years for a single inflammatory social media post, which does raise questions about sentencing proportionality in the UK... If you want to discuss proportionality of sentencing in relation to various crimes then start a new thread about it. Meanwhile, keeping on topic, I’m glad to see that an obvious spiv has got a decent sentence. Hopefully it acts as a deterrent to other dealers who are minded to rip off punters.

Digga said: One would imagine similar sentence. We will find out by the end of February: https://www.harrogateadvertiser.co.uk/news/people/... I say this as the child of two Yorkshire parents, with family there, but Yorkshire does seem to make them! On a less serious note was the fabled Yorkshire Classic Porsche. The question I would have is, if Mearns is found guilty of a charge of theft as mentioned in that article, will the stolen cars be returned to their original owners? I know this can happen if a car is stolen and subsequently sold in a private sale, but it would be a bit of a concern if one were to purchase a car from a dealership and subsequently have it taken from you and returned to its previous owner

Orangecurry said: paddy1970 said: While he received over 5 years for defrauding victims of £1.5 million, you can receive up to 7 years for a single inflammatory social media post, which does raise questions about sentencing proportionality in the UK... You are absolutely correct. The man who incited riots and advocated mass murder should just have been told he was a naughty boy. Could we keep this thread on topic, ie about fraudulent car dealers such as John Hawkins/Specialist Cars of Malton and Andrew Mearns/Gmund. This is a Porsche forum, so please keep discussions on politics etc to NP&E, General Gassing, Speed, Plod and the Law or the Lounge.

Monkeylegend said: MDL111 said: mmhh my car is on SOR with a dealer at the moment and he has all the documentation incl. ownership doc for the car (I should have held on to that like I did last time). I guess the trust and hope for the best approach can go terribly wrong if you are unlucky. I did not even take my copy of the contract with the minimum price agreed. Easy to see why people get "scammed" with very little comeback. indeed, can easily happen in my opinion. You don't exactly need to be a criminal mastermind.

Slippydiff said: Could we keep this thread on topic, ie about fraudulent car dealers such as John Hawkins/Specialist Cars of Malton and Andrew Mearns/Gmund. Is discussion of Yorkshire Classic Porsche and Sean Lockyear now permitted on PH?

YCP was thoroughly nasty man, quite the shouter.

MDL111 said: Monkeylegend said: MDL111 said: mmhh my car is on SOR with a dealer at the moment and he has all the documentation incl. ownership doc for the car (I should have held on to that like I did last time). I guess the trust and hope for the best approach can go terribly wrong if you are unlucky. I did not even take my copy of the contract with the minimum price agreed. Easy to see why people get "scammed" with very little comeback. indeed, can easily happen in my opinion. You don't exactly need to be a criminal mastermind. Yes, unfortunately there’s a lot of trust required which is then also open to abuse. I guess a recent parallel is GVE, although I don’t know too many details about that business failure or what they were like.

Paul Dishman said: Slippydiff said: Could we keep this thread on topic, ie about fraudulent car dealers such as John Hawkins/Specialist Cars of Malton and Andrew Mearns/Gmund. Is discussion of Yorkshire Classic Porsche and Sean Lockyear now permitted on PH? Posts deleted by admin, so apparently not.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c205d0xdj6po.a... Quite long article.

MDL111 said: mmhh my car is on SOR with a dealer at the moment and he has all the documentation incl. ownership doc for the car (I should have held on to that like I did last time). I guess the trust and hope for the best approach can go terribly wrong if you are unlucky. I did not even take my copy of the contract with the minimum price agreed. What is the "ownership doc"?

Alickadoo said: MDL111 said: mmhh my car is on SOR with a dealer at the moment and he has all the documentation incl. ownership doc for the car (I should have held on to that like I did last time). I guess the trust and hope for the best approach can go terribly wrong if you are unlucky. I did not even take my copy of the contract with the minimum price agreed. What is the "ownership doc"? In Germany called Fahrzeugbrief - if you have that in your possession, then you can get the name of the owner changed etc.

MDL111 said: Alickadoo said: MDL111 said: mmhh my car is on SOR with a dealer at the moment and he has all the documentation incl. ownership doc for the car (I should have held on to that like I did last time). I guess the trust and hope for the best approach can go terribly wrong if you are unlucky. I did not even take my copy of the contract with the minimum price agreed. What is the "ownership doc"? In Germany called Fahrzeugbrief - if you have that in your possession, then you can get the name of the owner changed etc. He'll be busily Googling that to see if he can still be a pedant.

Leins said: The question I would have is, if Mearns is found guilty of a charge of theft as mentioned in that article, will the stolen cars be returned to their original owners? I know this can happen if a car is stolen and subsequently sold in a private sale, but it would be a bit of a concern if one were to purchase a car from a dealership and subsequently have it taken from you and returned to its previous owner No, not necessarily The vehicle can become subject to disputed ownership with various owners having a claim to it It usually ends up in a court who will decide who has title to it, which can take years

Earthdweller said: Leins said: The question I would have is, if Mearns is found guilty of a charge of theft as mentioned in that article, will the stolen cars be returned to their original owners? I know this can happen if a car is stolen and subsequently sold in a private sale, but it would be a bit of a concern if one were to purchase a car from a dealership and subsequently have it taken from you and returned to its previous owner No, not necessarily The vehicle can become subject to disputed ownership with various owners having a claim to it It usually ends up in a court who will decide who has title to it, which can take years If it's an agreed SOR i don't believe it is treated as theft from the owner as they have given permission keys/documents etc to the dealer for them to sell their vehicle,the fact they didn't receive money makes them a creditor in the administration process. The new owner therfore has title.

CRA1G said: Earthdweller said: Leins said: The question I would have is, if Mearns is found guilty of a charge of theft as mentioned in that article, will the stolen cars be returned to their original owners? I know this can happen if a car is stolen and subsequently sold in a private sale, but it would be a bit of a concern if one were to purchase a car from a dealership and subsequently have it taken from you and returned to its previous owner No, not necessarily The vehicle can become subject to disputed ownership with various owners having a claim to it It usually ends up in a court who will decide who has title to it, which can take years If it's an agreed SOR i don't believe it is treated as theft from the owner as they have given permission keys/documents etc to the dealer for them to sell their vehicle,the fact they didn't receive money makes them a creditor in the administration process. The new owner therfore has title. I agree, that is somewhat different from someone who has legitimately and in good faith bought previously stolen property which would then go down the interpleader/disputed ownership route

CRA1G said: Earthdweller said: Leins said: The question I would have is, if Mearns is found guilty of a charge of theft as mentioned in that article, will the stolen cars be returned to their original owners? I know this can happen if a car is stolen and subsequently sold in a private sale, but it would be a bit of a concern if one were to purchase a car from a dealership and subsequently have it taken from you and returned to its previous owner No, not necessarily The vehicle can become subject to disputed ownership with various owners having a claim to it It usually ends up in a court who will decide who has title to it, which can take years If it's an agreed SOR i don't believe it is treated as theft from the owner as they have given permission keys/documents etc to the dealer for them to sell their vehicle,the fact they didn't receive money makes them a creditor in the administration process. The new owner therfore has title. the slight advantage in Germany is that you pay the owner not the dealer, but that only protects you if he genuinely becomes insolvent while your money were sitting in his account in a comparable indirect situation. It obviously does not help if he just sells your car and never tells you about it.

Wills2 said: MDL111 said: Alickadoo said: MDL111 said: mmhh my car is on SOR with a dealer at the moment and he has all the documentation incl. ownership doc for the car (I should have held on to that like I did last time). I guess the trust and hope for the best approach can go terribly wrong if you are unlucky. I did not even take my copy of the contract with the minimum price agreed. What is the "ownership doc"? In Germany called Fahrzeugbrief - if you have that in your possession, then you can get the name of the owner changed etc. He'll be busily Googling that to see if he can still be a pedant. The V5 is not proof of ownership ... it says so on the V5 ... it records the keepers details.

ChrisW. said: Wills2 said: MDL111 said: Alickadoo said: MDL111 said: mmhh my car is on SOR with a dealer at the moment and he has all the documentation incl. ownership doc for the car (I should have held on to that like I did last time). I guess the trust and hope for the best approach can go terribly wrong if you are unlucky. I did not even take my copy of the contract with the minimum price agreed. What is the "ownership doc"? In Germany called Fahrzeugbrief - if you have that in your possession, then you can get the name of the owner changed etc. He'll be busily Googling that to see if he can still be a pedant. The V5 is not proof of ownership ... it says so on the V5 ... it records the keepers details. I think the V5 is the equivalent of the German Fahrzeugschein, which you need to have with you when you are checked by the police. The Fahrzeugbrief on the other hand is usually somewhere at home. In the past it also caused confusion in a UK car as the Germans wanted to see some type of proof that I am the registered keeper and I never carried a copy of the V5 (not sure if that is still the case as I have not had a UK car for a while now).

Jailed for 5 years

Top comment on FB suggesting he can look forward to some bore scoring courtesy of his cellmate.

Earthdweller said: CRA1G said: Earthdweller said: Leins said: The question I would have is, if Mearns is found guilty of a charge of theft as mentioned in that article, will the stolen cars be returned to their original owners? I know this can happen if a car is stolen and subsequently sold in a private sale, but it would be a bit of a concern if one were to purchase a car from a dealership and subsequently have it taken from you and returned to its previous owner No, not necessarily The vehicle can become subject to disputed ownership with various owners having a claim to it It usually ends up in a court who will decide who has title to it, which can take years If it's an agreed SOR i don't believe it is treated as theft from the owner as they have given permission keys/documents etc to the dealer for them to sell their vehicle,the fact they didn't receive money makes them a creditor in the administration process. The new owner therfore has title. I agree, that is somewhat different from someone who has legitimately and in good faith bought previously stolen property which would then go down the interpleader/disputed ownership route Ah yes, that makes sense then. Not sure why the article mentions theft then, unless they mean in terms of not paying the proceeds on to the seller

Leins said: Ah yes, that makes sense then. Not sure why the article mentions theft then, unless they mean in terms of not paying the proceeds on to the seller Theft would probably relate to this bit: “ On other occasions he sold vehicles being stored at SCML ”

Digga said: Leins said: Ah yes, that makes sense then. Not sure why the article mentions theft then, unless they mean in terms of not paying the proceeds on to the seller Theft would probably relate to this bit: On other occasions he sold vehicles being stored at SCML Interesting, I didn’t spot that. Although I didn’t think you could sell a car without the V5, and if I was just storing a car somewhere I wouldn’t be handing over my V5 as part of the agreement. Wonder how he managed that?

Let's imagine that as part of the SOR process you ask to see the V5....."Just to confirm the details".....get the document number and using the online dealers system you can move the car from registered to keeper x to held by trade.....the new purchaser would then get a V5 post purchase and be non the wiser. The DVLA now sends out a note to you saying "you are no longer the registered keeper".....by then potentially too late.

Or let's suppose with the owners details you could obtain a duplicate V5 ???

Snowy999 said: Let's imagine that as part of the SOR process you ask to see the V5....."Just to confirm the details".....get the document number and using the online dealers system you can move the car from registered to keeper x to held by trade.....the new purchaser would then get a V5 post purchase and be non the wiser. The DVLA now sends out a note to you saying "you are no longer the registered keeper".....by then potentially too late. Not sure if that’s how gmund did it, but basically that’s what happened to my mate with his. It was quite a few weeks after the car had been sold and he got his notification from dvla - it was the first he knew about it and then couldn’t get hold of Mearns for a few weeks after as “he’d gone on a cruise”.

clive_candy said: Top comment on FB suggesting he can look forward to some bore scoring courtesy of his cellmate. Bore scoring over 5 years ........id love to see Hartech repair that one !

TJC46 said: Bore scoring over 5 years ........id love to see Hartech repair that one ! That would need a BIG overbore to get some compression back!

TJC46 said: clive_candy said: Top comment on FB suggesting he can look forward to some bore scoring courtesy of his cellmate. Bore scoring over 5 years ........id love to see Hartech repair that one ! Isn't that their closed deck (cell) conversion ??

Earthdweller said: Leins said: The question I would have is, if Mearns is found guilty of a charge of theft as mentioned in that article, will the stolen cars be returned to their original owners? I know this can happen if a car is stolen and subsequently sold in a private sale, but it would be a bit of a concern if one were to purchase a car from a dealership and subsequently have it taken from you and returned to its previous owner No, not necessarily The vehicle can become subject to disputed ownership with various owners having a claim to it It usually ends up in a court who will decide who has title to it, which can take years You’d also think it quite likely that most of those cars in that time will probably have been sold on now at least once maybe several time. Which will further muddy the waters.

Theres one comment hidden on the 911Uk threads that sums it all up for me... Someone, only now in 2025, has just spotted photos of his own car being used, without his knowledge, as the wedding car at Hawkins' daughters wedding The whole thing was absolutley brazen.

Yes, reading and hearing about some of the stories was frightening, similarly so that he held circa £240k of cars (no idea of the % held as SOR) and that the administrators expenses totalled some £415k.

If anyone on here was to own a vehicle sold by SCOM that had been sold between 2018-2020. Even if it was 2-3 owners ago. What would you consider doing now? Sell the vehicle? Or take no notice and be confident of fending off any action (however unlikely)should it come your way?

Is that a fair question ? If it were me, I would own a car that I had paid for. The fact that SCoM had not paid the previous owner is a matter between the previous owner and SCoM ... something about which I would have had no prior knowledge or control. Andrew at Gmund offered me a number of cars in his latter days ... I didn't buy, but if I had it would have been in complete innocence. People selling on SOR do need to understand the risks that they may be taking, particularly difficult when John / SCoM pretended to be creating such friendships. But the fact is that in law it was at their risk, hence they are creditors of the failed company and victims of Mr Hawkins fraud. The danger in your question is that it may create a perception that the cars embroiled in this may somehow be lesser cars now than they were prior to this ... in my view this is not the case. I own a car that I bought from SCoM over 10 years ago, it still has the SCoM key fob. Is that tainted ? There was a time when SCoM was a very good and respected dealer. His mistake was stepping over the line where he was trading in an insolvent manner and started spending other peoples money. When he has served his time it is my understanding that he will then have to deal with the rigours of the Proceeds of Crime legislation ... this is not over.

If you purchased a vehicle from SCOM during that period as an innocent buyer - meaning you paid fair market value and had no knowledge of any issues with how the business was operating - then you almost certainly have good legal title to that vehicle. The legal disputes arising from SCOM's collapse are primarily between the original consignment owners (who weren't paid) and the company/John Hawkins. Those disputes don't typically extend to subsequent purchasers who bought in good faith.

paddy1970 said: If you purchased a vehicle from SCOM during that period as an innocent buyer - meaning you paid fair market value and had no knowledge of any issues with how the business was operating - then you almost certainly have good legal title to that vehicle. The legal disputes arising from SCOM's collapse are primarily between the original consignment owners (who weren't paid) and the company/John Hawkins. Those disputes don't typically extend to subsequent purchasers who bought in good faith. Are you sure of that ?

jonttt said: paddy1970 said: If you purchased a vehicle from SCOM during that period as an innocent buyer - meaning you paid fair market value and had no knowledge of any issues with how the business was operating - then you almost certainly have good legal title to that vehicle. The legal disputes arising from SCOM's collapse are primarily between the original consignment owners (who weren't paid) and the company/John Hawkins. Those disputes don't typically extend to subsequent purchasers who bought in good faith. Are you sure of that ? I'm not convinced. If you buy a stolen car in good faith that doesn't mean it's yours.

I think its some trying someone trying to apply logic to the law.

SpyderMatt said: I know the legal system is slow, but how on earth can it take 6 years to get the case to court? Ironically costing a shed load of tax payers money to keep going. And whilst I have no sympathy for the man, having this hanging over your head for 6 years is a sentence in itself for most. Could have pled guilty at initial interview. Would have completed his sentence by now. Didn’t he go not guilty and then change his mind at the last minute. His choice to drag it out. He knew he was guilty.

Who knows what the reason for that might have been. There was so much evidence against him, why would he do that ?

Rational/logical thought processes didn't appear to apply to how he conducted his business affairs; why should they apply to much of anything else in his life? Like the gambler who is certain his next bet will be the big winner he has been waiting for and so richly deserves...

Is there two sledge hammers in the dartmoor quarry to make pebbles. The real sad part is the losses incurred.

jonttt said: Are you sure of that ? Do not understand the law in this situation, but as a seller you agree with SCOM to sell your vehicle on your behalf. SCOM have done this but then not passed the money on to the seller. Buyer is oblivious to any contract between seller and SCOM, they have bought and paid for the vehicle in good faith. I do not know the legal implications here but surely the buyer is now the owner of the car and the seller would have to chase SCOM for their money. Can anyone clarify this for definite, or is it all a bit vague.

BertBert said: jonttt said: paddy1970 said: If you purchased a vehicle from SCOM during that period as an innocent buyer - meaning you paid fair market value and had no knowledge of any issues with how the business was operating - then you almost certainly have good legal title to that vehicle. The legal disputes arising from SCOM's collapse are primarily between the original consignment owners (who weren't paid) and the company/John Hawkins. Those disputes don't typically extend to subsequent purchasers who bought in good faith. Are you sure of that ? I'm not convinced. If you buy a stolen car in good faith that doesn't mean it's yours. It gets muddy because the car hasn't been stolen, they didn't come and lift it off your driveway without your permission, you gave them the car the keys and documents (perhaps) as part of an agreement to sell the car, they sold it but didn't pay you, I think once that car has been sold it's gone unless you can prove the 3rd party buying the car knew about the fraud. But then again you have situations like Madoff and his Ponzi scheme whereby innocent investors had the money ripped back from them, I think some kind of escrow scheme needs to be in place that splits the owners funds from the dealers margin.

BertBert said: I'm not convinced. If you buy a stolen car in good faith that doesn't mean it's yours. As I understand it, you're correct. Having paid for it in good faith doesn't automatically make it yours, it's the property of the insurance company that paid out. In the case of those defrauded by SCoM and Gmund scenarios, the situation isn't as clear cut unfortunately.

Slippydiff said: As I understand it, you're correct. Having paid for it in good faith doesn't automatically make it yours, it's the property of the insurance company that paid out. In the case of those defrauded by SCoM and Gmund scenarios, the situation isn't as clear cut unfortunately. When I was selling a heavily modified car in 2019, I evaluated 3 firms who seemed legitimate for SOR transaction. One of these (Car Iconics) arrangements were that the buyer would pay me the seller total sale price and I would then pay Car Iconics their commission. I ultimately went with a more local firm for purely convenience reasons but I preferred CI’s transaction model.

gtsralph said: When I was selling a heavily modified car in 2019, I evaluated 3 firms who seemed legitimate for SOR transaction. One of these (Car Iconics) arrangements were that the buyer would pay me the seller total sale price and I would then pay Car Iconics their commission. I ultimately went with a more local firm for purely convenience reasons but I preferred CI s transaction model. So presumably the dealer can’t write out the invoice if he hasn’t received the money. Could be interesting if something went wrong.

911wise said: So presumably the dealer can t write out the invoice if he hasn t received the money. Could be interesting if something went wrong. Depends on who you are expecting to fix it. I've looked at SORs where it is explained as a private sale and others as a trade to consumer sale

911wise said: gtsralph said: When I was selling a heavily modified car in 2019, I evaluated 3 firms who seemed legitimate for SOR transaction. One of these (Car Iconics) arrangements were that the buyer would pay me the seller total sale price and I would then pay Car Iconics their commission. I ultimately went with a more local firm for purely convenience reasons but I preferred CI s transaction model. So presumably the dealer can t write out the invoice if he hasn t received the money. Could be interesting if something went wrong. The sale transaction is essentially a private sale with the seller paying a commission to IC upon receipt of funds from the buyer.

gtsralph said: The sale transaction is essentially a private sale with the seller paying a commission to IC upon receipt of funds from the buyer. If its something that works for you and you're fully aware of the risks (as a buyer) then why not?

BertBert said: Depends on who you are expecting to fix it. I've looked at SORs where it is explained as a private sale and others as a trade to consumer sale As a trade to consumer sale I’d be expecting the dealer to sort things out. Presumably on this basis you’re paying your money to the dealer?

Is there any lawyers on here that can actually state how SOR sits legally ? FWIW I sold a 1 yr old GT4 thru a very well respected dealer 2 yrs ago. It was SOR but they said they had a buyer lined up and was effectively sold if I gave it to them. I said OK and they came and drove the car away and I heard nothing for a week. £85k. I was getting quite twitchy and called them up, maybe a bit direct but certainly not rude, to be told “ I don t like your attitude”. FFS. They paid me the next day but a) so casual bearing in mind the £ involved and b) these stories on this thread illustrate I was right to feel v. uncomfortable. I will never use that dealer again even to buy from and will never SOR again, it s just too risky.. Edited by SpyderMatt on Thursday 15th January 21:54 Edited by SpyderMatt on Thursday 15th January 21:56

911wise said: BertBert said: Depends on who you are expecting to fix it. I've looked at SORs where it is explained as a private sale and others as a trade to consumer sale As a trade to consumer sale I d be expecting the dealer to sort things out. Presumably on this basis you re paying your money to the dealer? IME having bought and sold SOR, the dealers do sort out post purchase issues. Well the better ones do at any rate. That's one part of the cost of using them.

There's two things going on here 1. Civil contract between the dealer and car owner to sell car on owners behalf Dealer sells car which was agreed by the owner of said car and fails to forward funds That is a civil debt, the car is not stolen 2. Where the car is in the hands of the dealer for storage and he then sells the car without the knowledge or authority of the owner that is theft as he has dishonestly appropriated it with an intention to permanently deprive the owner of it 1. May fall into the definition of fraud however

911wise said: gtsralph said: The sale transaction is essentially a private sale with the seller paying a commission to IC upon receipt of funds from the buyer. If its something that works for you and you're fully aware of the risks (as a buyer) then why not? I have used this route with Dan and Stephen on a number of occasions. There is a sales agreement. In this agreement Car-Iconics are taking the risk ... the car is not released until the car is sold and the vendor paid ... the vendor is then invoiced and the risk is to Car-Iconics should the vendor not then pay their commission.

Theft by trickery & theft by deception are other legal nightmare terms Mostly liked/ endorsed by insurance companies not settling claims

Earthdweller said: There's two things going on here 1. Civil contract between the dealer and car owner to sell car on owners behalf Dealer sells car which was agreed by the owner of said car and fails to forward funds That is a civil debt, the car is not stolen 2. Where the car is in the hands of the dealer for storage and he then sells the car without the knowledge or authority of the owner that is theft as he has dishonestly appropriated it with an intention to permanently deprive the owner of it 1. May fall into the definition of fraud however sounds about right.... I bought a car from a dealer (as a dealer) who was selling SOR. we retailed the car and were then pursued by the previous keeper who had failed to have been paid. cutting a long story short, our buyer kept the car as it was found title had transferred when we bought it, as the selling dealer had the implicit permission to sell. personally, I'd be wary of SOR unless I knew the the trader very well

911wise said: BertBert said: Depends on who you are expecting to fix it. I've looked at SORs where it is explained as a private sale and others as a trade to consumer sale As a trade to consumer sale I d be expecting the dealer to sort things out. Presumably on this basis you re paying your money to the dealer? If you pay the dealer then they are the merchant of record and CRA applies.

[Image-only or quote-only post; no author-written text.] https://forums-images.pistonheads.com/63320/202608162413516?resize=720

"to have vehicles repatriated" - so then the buyer who bought in good faith gets screwed?

I've stated previously that I dealt with AM on three occasions, he had three of my cars on SOR : A 964 C2 (see below) a 997.1 GT3 and a 996 GT2. He paid for the 964 on collection, he paid less than I wanted for the car, but with a caveat, that being if he sold it for what he thought it was worth, he'd pay me the additional £1000 I'd wanted. I'm extremely cynical when it comes to used car dealers, so thought the car was sold and the matter finished. So you can imagine my surprise some six weeks later, when I opened a hand written envelope containing a cheque for £1000... The 997.1 GT3 remained in my garage despite being on SOR. The process took seven months, but AM found a buyer in January, who was expecting his bonus in May, he took a deposit and split it 50/50 with me. The car was duly sold in May, and the buyer paid the full asking price (£84k from memory) AM charged me a paltry £1000 commission for the sale. The 996 GT2 was delivered up to him in Sept/Oct, and still hadn't sold 10 months later. We agreed I should have the car back, and I duly collected it, no charges despite it having been cleaned/detailed at AM's expense. AM was apologetic for not having sold the car. I subsequently put the car on SOR with Tom at 911V, who said it had THE best 996 interior he'd seen (condition wise) and it took 2-3 months to sell. All the above dealings were pre-2010. So I have no beef with AM, nor indeed any skin in his latter games, from my perspective he did "alright by me". At some point in the next 3-4 years AM told me that the wealthy individual who'd bankrolled Gmund for the last decade had passed away. That subsequently became all too clear from the quality and quantity of stock Gmund began retailing. Regrettably in the following years, AM clearly made a conscious decision to "Rob Peter to pay Paul" and as we've seen with other Porsche (and high-end car dealerships more recently) ultimately that rarely ends well for any of the parties involved ... Timely YT video with regards to the above : However a 30 month sentence (which will no doubt be reduced to 15 months) doesn't seem long for the misery caused to the owners who were defrauded. And another one, this time in the US : Edited by Slippydiff on Sunday 16th August 13:51

I visited CPR in Oct 23 after Rennsport Reunion - seemed to be a thriving business with lots of cars and lots of activity. Knew nothing of them beforehand but was visiting friends in the area and one of their friends suggested I stick my head in the door. Got a full tour despite zero advance notice and they couldn't have been more hospitable. Not the first time I've seen the 2nd generation of a family take over a successful business and then run it into the ground. Is it complacency or not having the finger on the pulse as closely as the founder? Not reacting to cashflow changes fast enough? Most just fall on their sword and go into liquidation but some turn criminal to keep the lights on and pretend that all is fine. Like a gambling addict tomorrow my luck will improve?

CPR? Not sure who or what that is. Now I know, to my own cost, who YCP is.

Digga said: CPR? Not sure who or what that is. Now I know, to my own cost, who YCP is. YCP was a thoroughly nasty man with a real temper problem. In hind sight I think AM was possibly over the line a long time before it became obvious. A bit like John at Spec Cars I wouldn’t have trusted either of them as far as I could throw them.

AW10 said: I visited CPR in Oct 23 after Rennsport Reunion - seemed to be a thriving business with lots of cars and lots of activity. Knew nothing of them beforehand but was visiting friends in the area and one of their friends suggested I stick my head in the door. Got a full tour despite zero advance notice and they couldn't have been more hospitable. Not the first time I've seen the 2nd generation of a family take over a successful business and then run it into the ground. Is it complacency or not having the finger on the pulse as closely as the founder? Not reacting to cashflow changes fast enough? Most just fall on their sword and go into liquidation but some turn criminal to keep the lights on and pretend that all is fine. Like a gambling addict tomorrow my luck will improve? More often it’s the fact that the founder has the nous to start a business but future family members are useless/thick/lazy* delete as appropriate and would never be in the position of owning or running a business if it wasn’t for nepotism.

Franco5 said: More often it s the fact that the founder has the nous to start a business but future family members are useless/thick/lazy* delete as appropriate and would never be in the position of owning or running a business if it wasn t for nepotism. Or as they say in Yorkshire Clogs to Clogs in three generations

oddman said: Or as they say in Yorkshire Clogs to Clogs in three generations A story you see in about 50% of National Trust properties you visit (perhaps a few more generations)!

Digga said: CPR? Not sure who or what that is. Now I know, to my own cost, who YCP is. CPR is the southern California company in the 2nd of those YouTube videos above.