The 24 Hours of Lemons Forums → Lemons Newcomers → Car Claiming: What really goes down?
Come to think of it, the team that deserved the Curse more than any other in Lemons history didn't whine one bit. They took their punishment like men (and women) and totally redeemed themselves in the eyes of the crowd.
As a reformed law student, I am mostly amused by the fact that this thread has thus far managed to avoid answering the most pressing issue in my original post.
Taking as a given (a) that a car entered into the 24 Hours of Lemons is subject to claim for $500 at the end of the race, and (b) no amount of whining or litigation shall change such fate, I ask once more: Is a claimed car purchased "as-is" at the end of a race? Specifically, does the claimant get to haul a car off with all the spendy safety gear still bolted in, or does one have the opportunity to wrench it all out before it gets hauled off? Would *all* safety gear be exempt from a claim sale - for example, wheels, tires, brakes, etc?
Your question is moot since there never has been a claim and likely will never be a claim. It's like asking what color tie should you wear on your next trip to the moon.
But if there were to be a claim, then I suspect you could count on losing it all. Or not. Who cares, it's a moot point. Don't hold your breath on Jay or Nick giving you a prejudgment ruling.
what color tie should you wear on your next trip to the moon.
red, obviously. at least that's what i wore on my last trip, and it seemed to go over well.
anyway, you're right. someone could write and file the complaint themselves. but no one has done it after being cursed, so why would someone do it after being claimed? i'd suggest that the motivation is more than it's a hassle for jay to have this extra car than it is some fear of a lawsuit.
as far as unconscionability...come on. it's not as if anyone is coerced into agreeing to the rules. Jay/DD don't exert any leverage over potential participants. we all willingly agree to the terms, and we all clearly understand them. a term isn't unconscionable if the party accepts it. and a judge/jury is certainly going to find it at least a little persuasive that none of these other participants have a problem with the terms that are supposedly so unfair to the complainant.
Can we ban lawyers? I glazed over at 10 words into the second sentence.
as did i. 
This is a very interesting subject and I have questioned the legality of the Curse, Claiming and the Rules/Contract...
The curse is clearly the destruction of private property ...
Claiming is more or less a form of gambling...
I think I've said more than enough for now.
The statements you are using as your premise or foundation are pretty darned shaky themselves and lend themselves to some logical fallacies.
Private property? I would think you would need to prove both ownership and value. If legal ownership could be traced back to someone not involved in the civil suit, there goes the case (ie titled to someone else or no evidence of you having paid taxes on your motor vehicle purchase are two things that come to mind that could sink the case). Heck, even the term "destruction" is open to interpretation especially if the defense could find the vehicle's original owner and/or manufacturer to have them make sworn statements that the vehicle's condition prior to the "destruction" was in fact already modified so much beyond it's original design that it would already have been deemed "destroyed". If it were a salvage title, or if it were an insurance write-off that the insurance company required to be shredded/scrapped yet somehow found its way back into use... all of those trump the private property claim.
Gambling? As a willful participant in something that could result in this outcome that you yourself deemed as "gambling" simply makes you equally culpable for the end result and equally guilty of gambling.
As a Lemons newcomer, I don't know the personalities involved nor the board etiquette, but a post like this concerns me. I'd hate for this whole event to get shut down because of fear generated by post like those.
Let Buzz and Troy (the obvious lawyers) work it out probono. If they start charging us per hour for listening in on the conversation - I'd start to worry.
As a Lemons newcomer, I don't know the personalities involved nor the board etiquette, but a post like this concerns me.
The board etiquette is that lawyers get to write their briefs on the hoods of their cars!
Taking as a given (a) that a car entered into the 24 Hours of Lemons is subject to claim for $500 at the end of the race, and (b) no amount of whining or litigation shall change such fate, I ask once more: Is a claimed car purchased "as-is" at the end of a race? Specifically, does the claimant get to haul a car off with all the spendy safety gear still bolted in, or does one have the opportunity to wrench it all out before it gets hauled off? Would *all* safety gear be exempt from a claim sale - for example, wheels, tires, brakes, etc?
Given that the purpose is to discourage people from using an expensive "base" it would be reasonable to assume that the claiming would be for the car less all "free" components (safety, etc). As written, unlike the various "claiming might not be legal, etc", I do think that one has a reasonable argument there. And it could be easily clarified.
Steve
Instead of claiming, just make it a "judges choice" crusher. If somebody is that bad and doesn't by some miracle get peoples curse, just add Jays curse to it and crush two cars instead of one. Same thing applies though, that I doubt it would ever happen. Only bad thing is, never have a rule that you won't enforce. It disrespects everybody and encourages flaunting all the rules. I'd just quietly remove that clause, and rely on peoples curse and stiff judging penalties.
Instead of claiming, just make it a "judges choice" crusher. If somebody is that bad and doesn't by some miracle get peoples curse, just add Jays curse to it and crush two cars instead of one.
Or we can just put excessively bad drivers/cars on the trailer, as we've done so many times before.
things seem to work just fine as they are. although it would be interesting to see a car get claimed.
Let Buzz and Troy (the obvious lawyers) work it out probono. If they start charging us per hour for listening in on the conversation - I'd start to worry.
hrmmmm... 
Spank wrote:As a Lemons newcomer, I don't know the personalities involved nor the board etiquette, but a post like this concerns me.
The board etiquette is that lawyers get to write their briefs on the hoods of their cars!
I think he's gonna need a bigger canvas. How about we give him a weight exemption so he can run this? It won't all fit on the hood, but I am sure if he uses both sides and part of the roof he can get his attorneyish point across to us commoners...
I thought lawyers were banned in one of the other posts already? I had to weed through all of that crap before I got to some stuff I could understand. Those big words tend to give me a headache.
Claimer rules are generally just an attempt at keeping the playing field level. If you are building a car and have that in the back of your mind someone can take it off of you for only 500 clams, you may not cheat as much as you would if the rule was not in place.
I thought for sure when the bus got crushed at Reno that was a sign to the rest of us that Jay was going to claim himself a new padock rig from one of the hella cheatin teams
I thought for sure when the bus got crushed at Reno that was a sign to the rest of us that Jay was going to claim himself a new padock rig from one of the hella cheatin teams
I was trying to talk him into claiming that motorized Barcalounger that the Dirty Some Beaches team had at No Problem. Best Judgemobile ever!
Spinnetti wrote:Instead of claiming, just make it a "judges choice" crusher. If somebody is that bad and doesn't by some miracle get peoples curse, just add Jays curse to it and crush two cars instead of one.
Or we can just put excessively bad drivers/cars on the trailer, as we've done so many times before.
So, that just kinda re-affirms that the claimer rule is a paper tiger... best to just get rid of it eh? (or use it - been plenty of uber cheater cars).
I was trying to talk him into claiming that motorized Barcalounger that the Dirty Some Beaches team had at No Problem. Best Judgemobile ever!
Actually, it was the best way to take a look around the paddock after two and half hours in the WagoVan!
If they let me pull the seat, I'd be eternally grateful to have the Craptation claimed in Stafford. Somehow I don't think they would want it, though...
I know everybody laughs at the Citation, but I seem to remember the X-11 winning more than once in SCCA showroom stock back in the day....I believe the late X-11's were more than just tape stripes
Only bad thing is, never have a rule that you won't enforce. It disrespects everybody and encourages flaunting all the rules. I'd just quietly remove that clause, and rely on peoples curse and stiff judging penalties.
1.5: Winners and Prizes: Recipient of the People's Choice Award, as determined by totally unscientific, and almost certainly totally unfair, pit-side opinion and chitchat, receives $500.
I've done 3 races and never voted on the People's Choice. Supposedly we are not competitent enough but we can still vote to curse a car.
Sorry to disappoint you guys, I'm not a lawyer. Just posted info from a business law class about contracts.
So, is the issue black and white? Judging from this discussion, you decide.
What, exactly, is broken about Lemons that everyone keeps trying to fix? Have you participated in a Lemons weekend? Did you have a good time? Yes? Great, come on back for another. No? I don't think tweaking the rules will make you like it any better. Maybe some other series is more appropriate for you.
Unless, of course, you're complaining about Loverman. That's just good fun.
I know everybody laughs at the Citation, but I seem to remember the X-11 winning more than once in SCCA showroom stock back in the day....I believe the late X-11's were more than just tape stripes
You haven't driven this particular Citation.
What, exactly, is broken about Lemons that everyone keeps trying to fix? Have you participated in a Lemons weekend? Did you have a good time? Yes? Great, come on back for another. No? I don't think tweaking the rules will make you like it any better. Maybe some other series is more appropriate for you.
Damn, that should be put at the top of the board. Everybody is running around like a chicken with its head chopped off trying to "fix" Lemons.
It sure doesn't look broke from here.
I know everybody laughs at the Citation, but I seem to remember the X-11 winning more than once in SCCA showroom stock back in the day....I believe the late X-11's were more than just tape stripes
The only thing that I get out of this quote is that the SCCA was racing crapcans long before Jay created this series. Now keep quiet about that - given the financial trouble that the SCCA is in, they may come after Jay for royalties.
The Claiming rule is there to discourage "alleged" cheating. The officials are the ones that can use it not competitors/participants.
As a competitor, if you want a good or better car, shut your pie hole, pickup a wrench and build one. No one is stopping you. Your car is a good as you make it.
You ain't showing up with $500 and getting a cheap upgrade.
The 24 Hours of Lemons Forums → Lemons Newcomers → Car Claiming: What really goes down?