WTB: 1975 914 in Palma Green Options

[mepstein]

I always recommend driving or flying out to see the car. It sounds expensive until you have to deal with problems you didn’t expect. We all have our own perception of condition.

[mepstein]

DP

[paule]

I always recommend driving or flying out to see the car. It sounds expensive until you have to deal with problems you didn’t expect. We all have our own perception of condition.

I agree but would add you'd also have to observe the car being put on the transport to ensure parts aren't stripped before shipping. In this case, pictures and an email stated the parts to be included but were removed before shipping. Condition is subjective but showing and listing specific parts to be included is not. Steel wheels vs Mahles, yeah he won't notice.

[930cabman]

Unfortunate, sound like you are dealing with a bad dude. Best of luck

Maybe you can send the boys over and rough him up a bit

[930cabman]

If the example in your possession is solid, you may consider cutting you losses and move ahead. The number of PG examples is small and those being solid is less.

[paule]

If the example in your possession is solid, you may consider cutting you losses and move ahead. The number of PG examples is small and those being solid is less.

That is being considered. The car is at a shop and the next step is to do a deep evaluation of condition and to get it running and then I will decide from there. I sent another email to the seller requesting the missing parts but doubt he will respond. He's still posting on this site so I assume he has seen the email.

[paule]

The business has been unresponsive to emails and phone calls. Complaints against the business have been filed with the state of Wisconsin department of Consumer Protection and the state of Washington Attorney Generals Office at the end of October.

Last week I requested a PPS from PCNA. In phone conversations, PCNA unofficially stated the car was built as a 1.8L not a 2L and confirmed by the format of the engine numbers and online public information the engine GC004587, albeit a 2L, and transmission HA01105 are from 1976 production. I'll have formal documentation in 1-2 weeks regarding a factory 1.8L build however the preliminary information was added to the complaints that the description of car (over time, phone calls and emails) was misleading.

[rhodyguy]

I can only hope you prevail. Go get em’. No quarter, no mercy.

[930cabman]

The business has been unresponsive to emails and phone calls. Complaints against the business have been filed with the state of Wisconsin department of Consumer Protection and the state of Washington Attorney Generals Office at the end of October.

Last week I requested a PPS from PCNA. In phone conversations, PCNA unofficially stated the car was built as a 1.8L not a 2L and confirmed by the format of the engine numbers and online public information the engine GC004587, albeit a 2L, and transmission HA01105 are from 1976 production. I'll have formal documentation in 1-2 weeks regarding a factory 1.8L build however the preliminary information was added to the complaints that the description of car (over time, phone calls and emails) was misleading.

Send the boys to his front door, see if he changes his tune

Another tack would be to leave the negative in the past and move forward and get her running/driving/looking good

[paule]

The business has been unresponsive to emails and phone calls. Complaints against the business have been filed with the state of Wisconsin department of Consumer Protection and the state of Washington Attorney Generals Office at the end of October.

Last week I requested a PPS from PCNA. In phone conversations, PCNA unofficially stated the car was built as a 1.8L not a 2L and confirmed by the format of the engine numbers and online public information the engine GC004587, albeit a 2L, and transmission HA01105 are from 1976 production. I'll have formal documentation in 1-2 weeks regarding a factory 1.8L build however the preliminary information was added to the complaints that the description of car (over time, phone calls and emails) was misleading.

Send the boys to his front door, see if he changes his tune

Another tack would be to leave the negative in the past and move forward and get her running/driving/looking good

Good advice. I'm waiting for others to complete their work first. I received the official PPS document, it is a 1.8L. A copy of the document was sent to the two state agencies as both were interested in the new information.

[paule]

Complaints filed with Washington State Attorney General Office, case 629217, and State of Wisconsin – Consumer Protection, case 134896, October 2022.

Business Name: 914werke
3514 NE 88th Street
Seattle, WA 98115

Bus Phone: (206) 455-3834
Email: info@914werke.com
Website: 914werke.com

Awaiting response from 914werke or the business attorney, Mr. B Bradford Kogut, for resolution.

[Craigers17]

Really none of my business, but my 2 cents would be to try to "squash" this. Whenever you buy a car sight unseen, the expectations/representations of said car are subjective. If you have written documentation that the car was supposed to come with Mahles, fog lights, emissions, etc., at "XXX" price in the same document, then I can see your beef.

Other than that, degree of rust can be subjective. Have you actually seen the car in person yet? I'm not trying to take sides or be argumentative, but you might already have a solid base ready for you to restore or have someone else restore. It's gonna be a lot more rewarding the sooner you can drive it, rather than to litigate it to death or search for a unicorn that you're not even sure still exists.

Also, again not taking sides, but Rich is a well respected member of the community. Honestly I don't know him at all, but I have purchased a handful of parts from him at reasonable prices with no drama, and they have all been received in "as advertised" or "better than advertised" condition. I really wish you the best in your restoration and hope you guys can bury this and move on.

[Front yard mechanic]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/barf.gif)

[paule]

Really none of my business, but my 2 cents would be to try to "squash" this. Whenever you buy a car sight unseen, the expectations/representations of said car are subjective. If you have written documentation that the car was supposed to come with Mahles, fog lights, emissions, etc., at "XXX" price in the same document, then I can see your beef.

I have the emails listing parts plus pictures taken by seller of the car, both as offered and when the shipper picked it up showing steel wheels. Emailed seller immediately to ship Mahles plus any other missing parts from description. Plus I have emails the car was a complete 2L..No mention that it is '75 1.8L with a '76 2L engine.

[paule]

Extensive comprehensive documentation was provided to both state agencies.

[rick 918-S]

Why don't you sell it on and look for another car. What did you pay for it? If you didn't want a project that does not look like the car you really want anyway.

[mepstein]

I hope both parties can work it out. Life is too short to fight about old cars. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)

[vitamin914]

I can see you are looking for moral support or vindication, but that is not fair to ask for that on this forum.

Why? because it involves another member. It was a private transaction that, other than those directly involved, we collectively know nothing about. No proof to what was said, shown or promised. It is unfair to take either side.

The car looks far from numbers matching great. I would be surprised if it was offered as anything other than as is. If there were items missing that were promised or implied that is a different matter and maybe a matter of interpretation. The fact that it was sold as 2.0L and it had at 2.0L engine, how is that a misrepresentation? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) You had to get the records to prove it was built as a 1.8, so what?

Man, with those photos... somehow this is starting to look like a "sour grapes" purchase that the restoration will be more involved than was hoped. Caveat emptor or buyer beware comes to mind. If the two parties cannot come to a resolution, your only option is to go to court to have it addressed. Public consumer agencies are not going to be your solution. A judge has to decide where this ends and if there was any intent of misrepresentation or just a case of misinterpretation. I am guessing that the Mahles were "expected" because they were on the car in that photo. That could be a point of contention.

So many times there have been posts about checking the car out yourself or paying a third party to do it for you. Very wise words for everyone to remember. Possibly missing items aside, it avoids screwing yourself with unrealistic rose coloured glasses of sentimentalism giving you different expectations.

I just restored my 1983 Firebird (that I have had since new) and that cost almost double what I originally paid for it. Sentimentalism is expensive.

Best of luck. Like @mepstein said, life is too short to fight over old cars.