VS Arizona Bankruptcy? - Big Rumors Floating Around Today

@WNGD posted:

Perhaps if you'd already been given the assigned VIN on the chassis and can prove it?

Even if you did already own it the paint shop could still put a lien on it and being the registered owner, if you had a title, you’d be responsible for clearing the lien. Hence you’d be paying for the paint job twice.

But that’s not how it works here. You’re under contract to buy the car when it’s finished. Until then it isn’t titled yet. The other reason it isn’t titled yet is it has to be inspected by the titling authority of the state where it’s going to be titled.

@Impala posted:

Holy S! Always knew that the Arizona operation was a little sketchy but didn’t know it would end like this. I am sad for the victims who put deposits in; I hope they can recoup their investments.

After my experience with CMC, I always knew it would end like this.

@Robert M posted:

Even if you did already own it the paint shop could still put a lien on it and being the registered owner, if you had a title, you’d be responsible for clearing the lien. Hence you’d be paying for the paint job twice.

But that’s not how it works here. You’re under contract to buy the car when it’s finished. Until then it isn’t titled yet. The other reason it isn’t titled yet is it has to be inspected by the titling authority of the state where it’s going to be titled.

Manufacturers don’t have titles. They have MSOs. It all depends on their process how they generate those Ser # and that paperwork. Given the rest of their MO, I’d venture a WAG that it was a “day late and a dollar short.”

A title is generated when the first owner turns it in to their state DMV.

Lied too and mislead for two years! Came out and visited the shop and everything seemed on up and up. Gut told me very mismanaged but I had hope.......stupid!

For those with deposits and "cars in production" have a plan of action?

I was hoping one of you guys had a plan of action , im sure some one here is clued up . I’m in England but I will do what ever I can to assist . Etc . I have made a report  to Goodyear police and done the attorney general , so I I presume I just wait but as a collective that’s got to be something .

What did Goodyear police say? I wasn't sure local PD could do anything?

Please refer to Prev posts.
The Goodyear police have requested to no longer file complaints. They would simply like all parties to file AZ atty general complaints only. They will determine if there are criminal charges and then the Goodyear police will collectively gather all victims complaints from them.
Getting any money is prob not going to happen anytime soon if at all.
I would recommend anyone who wired funds to also contact your bank and report the fraud.

The investigating officer has been contacting me daily in regards to this so I believe I prob have the most up to date info.

Thank you Adam

No that’s fine , they were really helpful . They just wanted all my email correspondence.  

@dlearl476 posted:

Manufacturers don’t have titles. They have MSOs. It all depends on their process how they generate those Ser # and that paperwork. Given the rest of their MO, I’d venture a WAG that it was a “day late and a dollar short.”

A title is generated when the first owner turns it in to their state DMV.

I got that. My explanation above was two part. The first part being a hypothetical IF.

Second part explaining why there is no title yet.

They need to determine if there is any fraud by him sending pics of same cars to multiple people or even progress pics of wrong cars to people. Selling same car to multiple people is a Ponzi. If you simply just put down money for a car that is not what Goodyear PD is looking for

I have pictures, emails, and text's. I even have the VIN number Matt had sent me assigned to my car.

Well that may work If they can trace that vin and see if it was sold to someone else etc. @MidCentury

@Robert M posted:

I got that. My explanation above was two part. The first part being a hypothetical IF.

Second part explaining why there is no title yet.

@dlearl476

Robert, I'm not so sure that dlear1476 is entirely correct, at least in the case of Vintage Speedsters Arizona.  The MSO thing might be correct for builders like Special Edition (BECK) who don't use a VW pan, but Vintage Arizona was building cars with a VW pan and had VW title when they acquired the donor VW, which they would simply pass on to the new owner when the build was complete.

@Troy Sloan posted:

@dlearl476

Robert, I'm not so sure that dlear1476 is entirely correct, at least in the case of Vintage Speedsters Arizona.  The MSO thing might be correct for builders like Special Edition (BECK) who don't use a VW pan, but Vintage Arizona was building cars with a VW pan and had VW title when they acquired the donor VW, which they would simply pass on to the new owner when the build was complete.

I would bet that the majority, if not all, of those VIN#s are on a PNO, or Planned Non Op. That is so they can have a few dozen or a few hundred pans in storage and they're not paying registration fees on them. As soon as the vehicle is completed the VIN is transferred to the buyer who can go get the car registered.

Porsche has already sent me the VIN number for my 2023 Boxster but I can guarantee you it isn't in my name yet. It hasn't left the port as it is just sitting there waiting to be loaded onto the RoRo.

@Robert M posted:

I would bet that the majority, if not all, of those VIN#s are on a PNO, or Planned Non Op. That is so they can have a few dozen or a few hundred pans in storage and they're not paying registration fees on them. As soon as the vehicle is completed the VIN is transferred to the buyer who can go get the car registered.

Porsche has already sent me the VIN number for my 2023 Boxster but I can guarantee you it isn't in my name yet. It hasn't left the port as it is just sitting there waiting to be loaded onto the RoRo.

Agreed, but my point was that in this case they do have a title, not an MSO which is what dlear1476 stated.

@ADAM SCHROEDER posted:

They need to determine if there is any fraud by him sending pics of same cars to multiple people or even progress pics of wrong cars to people. Selling same car to multiple people is a Ponzi. If you simply just put down money for a car that is not what Goodyear PD is looking for

The only thing that adds teeth to the case at this point is the kind of thing Adam points to here, such evidence of a blatant misrepresentation or Ponzi scheme, like representing the same car to multiple people or sending progress pics or VIN# from a past build (hard to prove). I finally pinned him down w/ an email of a completion date of 60 days, which came and went, but even that is understandable legally in the scheme of business failure. Unfortunately from a legal standpoint, as long as he was operating and delivering cars (even 1 per month), he was a going concern and could make the defense he would get to the backlog in time, he was hindered by "Covid supply chain issues".

Aside from something like my email, he didn't have a deadline so he would not be in default (I was in the process of using it to force refund). We all can pretty well guess what was going on but legally, going broke is not criminal. So anyone with that evidence of true fraud should bring that to the Goodyear PD and AZ AG. And then there are civil suits with uncertain recoveries. Otherwise not sure what there is short of torches and pitchforks

@Troy Sloan posted:

Agreed, but my point was that in this case they do have a title, not an MSO which is what dlear1476 stated.

Correct, except it wouldn't be in the buyer's name, even if they sent the VIN number to the buyer. The title remains in the name of the company until the car is completed and sale is completed. And that's if the purchase of the donor car was done properly and title transferred to the business as it should have been.

@Dave

I believe you are correct, best in my opinion is provide all information (emails, pics, text's etc..) and hope for the best. If we get anything will be penny's on the dollar. I firmly believe Matt negligent and borderline criminal....all about proof. 

FYI:  Best to use the term "alleged" than have said individual alleged retaliate which happens all too often.   Use the PM option for specifics to individuals. AND ...... use common sense when replying to unfamiliar persons posting.....

@Alan Merklin posted:

FYI:  Best to use the term "alleged" than have said individual alleged retaliate which happens all too often.

Exactly the reason I was very vague in my original post.  FYI. The title of my original post was revised, I guess by Theron, but for the record, I did not mention a company name in my original post.

Wow, this is terrible.

Did anyone see the VS new build on Bring A Trailer a few weeks ago? The seller had this car on consignment... I'm curious to know if this was a customer's car being consigned by Matt through the selling dealer (911r on Bring A Trailer) Avant-Garde Collection in Portland, pretty sure the car wasn't in the physical hands of the consigning dealership. Here is the VIN on that car's auction: VIN: 118639916. Speedster only had 360 miles on it, still brand new. Curious if Matt was taking orders funded by clients and spec-ing them out to sell on BaT to acquire more funds for the company to keep it going?

Link to auction: https://bringatrailer.com/list...a-vintage-speedster/

Here is also another one built by Vintage Speedsters of Arizona that was sold on Bring A Trailer back on 5/18/22 with 466 miles on it, still brand new. VIN: 1332157079.

Link to auction: https://bringatrailer.com/list...ster-1957-speedster/

Here is a third one, sold out of Phoenix, Arizona which was completed by Matt in Arizona. Brand new build, says completed Feb. 2021. VIN: 117228533.

Link to auction: https://bringatrailer.com/list...speedster-replica-4/

Maybe these were promised to other clients? Not sure, hope this helps.

@WallyNeil Are you a victim of Vintage Arizona also?

@MidCentury @Andrew1111 @Dave Graziano @ADAM SCHROEDER

I sent you guys a private message about this ordeal. Hover your cursor over the blue box at the top right of the page and the drop down box will open so you can access it.

@Robert M posted:

@WallyNeil Are you a victim of Vintage Arizona also?

Thankfully no. I always browse this forum in hopes of one day owning a speedster replica and felt I should share what I've observed. Hope it helps.

@Alan Merklin posted:

FYI:  Best to use the term "alleged" than have said individual alleged retaliate which happens all too often.

As for "alleged" representations here, I know we all get sensitized to maintain the legal out (like every car listing now says restoration "is said have been performed"). But again, while I'm not an atty, I know the bar for libel includes 1) a misstatement of fact, 2) malicious intent and 3) demonstrable damages such as monetary loss or tangible reputational loss...all of which is a stretch in this case. Just the same, good to be mindful and stick to the facts

@WallyNeil posted:

Wow, this is terrible.

Did anyone see the VS new build on Bring A Trailer a few weeks ago? The seller had this car on consignment... I'm curious to know if this was a customer's car being consigned by Matt through the selling dealer (911r on Bring A Trailer) Avant-Garde Collection in Portland, pretty sure the car wasn't in the physical hands of the consigning dealership. Here is the VIN on that car's auction: VIN: 118639916. Speedster only had 360 miles on it, still brand new. Curious if Matt was taking orders funded by clients and spec-ing them out to sell on BaT to acquire more funds for the company to keep it going?

Link to auction: https://bringatrailer.com/list...a-vintage-speedster/

Here is also another one built by Vintage Speedsters of Arizona that was sold on Bring A Trailer back on 5/18/22 with 466 miles on it, still brand new. VIN: 1332157079.

Link to auction: https://bringatrailer.com/list...ster-1957-speedster/

Here is a third one, sold out of Phoenix, Arizona which was completed by Matt in Arizona. Brand new build, says completed Feb. 2021. VIN: 117228533.

Link to auction: https://bringatrailer.com/list...speedster-replica-4/

Maybe these were promised to other clients? Not sure, hope this helps.

The first link shown above was NOT sold. It didn't meet the Reserve and the auction ended @ $54,500.

@Dave Graziano posted:

As for "alleged" representations here, I know we all get sensitized to maintain the legal out (like every car listing now says restoration "is said have been performed"). But again, while I'm not an atty, I know the bar for libel includes 1) a misstatement of fact, 2) malicious intent and 3) demonstrable damages such as monetary loss or tangible reputational loss...all of which is a stretch in this case. Just the same, good to be mindful and stick to the facts

That doesn’t mean you’re immune to thousands of dollars of attorney’s fees if you’re dealing with a bad actor. Anyone can sue anyone for anything. It’s only after possibly thousands of dollars that a judge rules the above. I know several people who have had to deal with it.

@WallyNeil posted:

Wow, this is terrible.

Did anyone see the VS new build on Bring A Trailer a few weeks ago? The seller had this car on consignment... I'm curious to know if this was a customer's car being consigned by Matt through the selling dealer (911r on Bring A Trailer) Avant-Garde Collection in Portland, pretty sure the car wasn't in the physical hands of the consigning dealership. Here is the VIN on that car's auction: VIN: 118639916. Speedster only had 360 miles on it, still brand new. Curious if Matt was taking orders funded by clients and spec-ing them out to sell on BaT to acquire more funds for the company to keep it going?

Link to auction: https://bringatrailer.com/list...a-vintage-speedster/

Here is also another one built by Vintage Speedsters of Arizona that was sold on Bring A Trailer back on 5/18/22 with 466 miles on it, still brand new. VIN: 1332157079.

Link to auction: https://bringatrailer.com/list...ster-1957-speedster/

Here is a third one, sold out of Phoenix, Arizona which was completed by Matt in Arizona. Brand new build, says completed Feb. 2021. VIN: 117228533.

Link to auction: https://bringatrailer.com/list...speedster-replica-4/

Maybe these were promised to other clients? Not sure, hope this helps.

Good info. Thanks for posting. The trick now is to match those cars with possible buyers that had deposits on them.

Unfortunately, none of the above is relevant to the facts of the bankruptcy.  The big picture is that a company in bankruptcy does not have the funds to repay all creditors.  Creditors will be ranked by the bankruptcy court as either secured or unsecured.

Secured creditors are paid first, and are almost always institutions that have a security interest in the debtor's assets.  Think banks, mortgage companies, etc.

Unsecured creditors are those like customers who pay deposits, but have no security interest in the debtor's other assets, either by collateral guarantee, lien, etc. 

A local law enforcement agency, or the BK court itself, may find that the bankrupt applicant himself/herself has committed bankruptcy fraud, in which case criminal penalties may apply.  However, while this may delight a creditor, it will not help repayment of any debt that is covered by the BK proceedings.  If local law enforcement prosecutes a local company for criminal fraud, they need to prove intent.  A competent criminal defense attorney will make it difficult to do so, absent written admissions of same.  Even the local district attorney's (or prosecuting attorney) office can find it hard to prove fraud beyond a reasonable doubt.  These types of prosecutions are time-consuming and expensive.  Crooks know this.  That's why so many unscrupulous companies go the bankruptcy route.

The foregoing is not legal advice.  I have been involved in two BK proceedings as a creditor, and have learned the above, much to my dismay.

Gnash your teeth and beat your breast, but be prepared to receive bad news.  BK is a federal body of law that is designed to aid the debtor, not the creditor.

I’m afraid there’s a long line of creditors waiting in front of us, maybe the govt too for unpaid taxes. As any of us have found in these situations, the one thing you can count on is, we’re only seeing the tip of the iceberg, there’s more bad news we can’t imagine yet

@Jim Kelly posted:

Unfortunately, none of the above is relevant to the facts of the bankruptcy.  The big picture is that a company in bankruptcy does not have the funds to repay all creditors.  Creditors will be ranked by the bankruptcy court as either secured or unsecured.

Secured creditors are paid first, and are almost always institutions that have a security interest in the debtor's assets.  Think banks, mortgage companies, etc.

Unsecured creditors are those like customers who pay deposits, but have no security interest in the debtor's other assets, either by collateral guarantee, lien, etc.

A local law enforcement agency, or the BK court itself, may find that the bankrupt applicant himself/herself has committed bankruptcy fraud, in which case criminal penalties may apply.  However, while this may delight a creditor, it will not help repayment of any debt that is covered by the BK proceedings.  If local law enforcement prosecutes a local company for criminal fraud, they need to prove intent.  A competent criminal defense attorney will make it difficult to do so, absent written admissions of same.  Even the local district attorney's (or prosecuting attorney) office can find it hard to prove fraud beyond a reasonable doubt.  These types of prosecutions are time-consuming and expensive.  Crooks know this.  That's why so many unscrupulous companies go the bankruptcy route.

The foregoing is not legal advice.  I have been involved in two BK proceedings as a creditor, and have learned the above, much to my dismay.

Gnash your teeth and beat your breast, but be prepared to receive bad news.  BK is a federal body of law that is designed to aid the debtor, not the creditor.

Wouldn’t misleading customers, selling off assets, and moving out of state prove intent. I mean nobody robs a bank by accident.

Not to mention using the interwebs and FICA insured banks makes it a federal felony wire/banking fraud  if I’m not mistaken.

Maybe you know something that hasn't been published on this site, which is where I've gotten all my knowledge of the matter.

You don't seem to get it.  A competent BK attorney will advise the debtor how to maximize the amount of assets he can legally keep.  Misleading customers may be unethical, and there is no law against selling corporate assets or moving locations.  What a creditor sees as illegal behavior may be a debtor minimizing his losses.  Of course, when a debtor reduces his losses, creditors lose once again.

You need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the above were done with intent to defraud.  In addition, if you complain to a local law enforcement agency, they will enforce state laws, not federal laws.

I have not written any of this in defense of the behavior of the company or the owner.  Far from it.  However, I'm busy, just like all of us, and my dog isn't in this fight.  Do some research.  Criminals already know the law, it's the squares like us that need to understand what the law can and can't do. 

Re Jim above, all very true, that is the reality. Another thing that is true, that we're all speculating way ahead of the game here and can only guess what will (likely) happen. We know Matt seems to have gone silent, the business appears to be shuttered, but we're really in the dark and it's all conjecture. He sent an email that we know of to one customer where he signaled an intention to go BK and also signaled that he's judgment-proof (broke). And the other thing we know is that we (i.e., the victims) have all allegedly learned not to trust what he says, so disregard the contents of that email, it could just be a ploy. He has not filed the business and I don't know what might force him to file it - I guess creditors filing liens, which will probably take time. This is likely a slow-moving train wreck, all we victims can do is strap in and stay tuned for opportunities to keep the pressure on

BTW also occurs to me that, unless anyone knows otherwise, we have no idea as to the ownership of the business, the legal form, etc. I believe was the principle owner and I heard him refer to Will as a minor partner. On the other hand, the legal judgment doc from the VS CA royalty procedure referred to the VS AZ "owner" as "Michael Teerink". Who knows if this was a really lame clerical error or if the owner is someone else. Unfortunately we have more questions than answers

Which molds was “AZ” using ?

Did they make new molds , or ???????

@imperial posted:

Which molds was “AZ” using ?

Did they make new molds , or ???????

If you read the court case posted above you will find it; I did but can’t recall off the top of my head because it’s a convoluted story.

Yes, based on what I understand from the legal doc, it was bodies from the shop in Ensenada which would have been the VS-CA molds. Matt claimed to me that he was having trouble getting bodies from Mex this past year, had made new molds and was trying a local AZ shop making bodies...then he said they weren't sufficient quality and turned back to Mex. I don't know if there was any truth to that or just buying more time, but it appears all the AZ cars produced had the bodies from the VS-CA molds in Mex. At least that's my understanding

@Dave Graziano posted:

Yes, based on what I understand from the legal doc, it was bodies from the shop in Ensenada which would have been the VS-CA molds. Matt claimed to me that he was having trouble getting bodies from Mex this past year, had made new molds and was trying a local AZ shop making bodies...then he said they weren't sufficient quality and turned back to Mex. I don't know if there was any truth to that or just buying more time, but it appears all the AZ cars produced had the bodies from the VS-CA molds in Mex. At least that's my understanding

And when he said he 'turned back to Mexico" that doesn't necessarily mean Greg's source.  There are a couple of other Mexico sources.

This scenario is classic of a small company that acquires a business from another.  I hope that Kirk or his family received all of his money from the sale and the sale was not structured to depend on future payments.  If so at least he should be a secured creditor.  It will be interesting to see if this company is acquired out of bankruptcy.  It probably would have a better shot of being bought out of bankruptcy if it was still in Hawaiin Gardens and still had Kirk's crew in place so that it would be more turnkey.