Graded Historic Logbooks & C of D's

[Admin]

There has been some discussion on this between members on this most significant change in how our category is managed. The Board would like to put forward their position on this recent change, and below is a summary from our Secretary, Barry Thew.

The link provided at the bottom of these comments will put you into the CAMS website where an explanation as to the need for a graded logbook has been provided by the Chairman of the Historic Commission, Mr. Bob Cracknell.

From the outset may I say how disappointed the management of the association is and question as to why we (Group C & A categories) need such a system. The rules governing our 2 categories were written by members of the association and (accepted by the HCC and approved by CAMS) in a very finite manner (more so than any previous category) so as to prevent the possibility of recreated cars and car’s with any questionable history having the opportunity of being officially recognized.

To provide a little additional background, a few weeks prior to the April 2009 HCC meeting in Sydney, the HCC held a meeting with CAMS Eligibility officers from the various states in Melbourne, at this meeting it was stated that the new graded system would not include Group C & A Touring cars.

The association had sought permission some time prior to the Sydney meeting to present a case against any proposed graded log book system. Beach Thomas and I attended the April meeting in Sydney and after presenting a serious case and strongly debating a variety of issues for and against the new system, Beach and I left the meeting knowing we were going to have to accept that the HCC would introduce as a minimum a 2 tier system for Group C & A Touring Cars.

A couple of weeks after the Sydney meeting the word filtered out that there would be a full graded logbook system for both Group C & A and that the commission were also going to accept re-shelled cars.

It is not hard given the above decisions to understand that many of our members (and car owning non members) are more than a little upset, we all have stories to tell as to how we have had to go thru the CAMS Olympics, jump thru the hoops and over the hurdles etc with our application for a historic logbook and C of D, and then pay CAMS a fee of $600. Now to add insult to injury, if you would like to change up to a graded logbook you will be required to pay an additional fee of $330, however those applying in the new system now will only need to pay the one fee.

www.cams.com.au/en/Sport/Historics.aspx (http://www.cams.com.au/en/Sport/Historics.aspx)

[Willofan]

I would like to add some points to this debate. I think that CAMS decision to rank the Historic CoDs across the classes has to be worth a lot to the Group C/A Association, the members and those that have been watching on the sidelines.

Reading the Historic minutes and the CAMS newsletter announcements it appears they have carefully considered every possible option to ensure integrity of the Historic classes and the vehicles that have been preserved or carefully restored since their day. Plus allowing some of the forgotten many with broken history lines that are tucked away in sheds to reappear and run alongside the true cars to create the full spectacular.

My points on the decision are;
1. Strength comes in numbers; Once the process starts in July, the association should grow both in numbers & financially and this will generate even more interest in the association, the events and in the cars.

2. More interest means more exposure, more exposure means public interest and where there is public interest there are sponsors wanting a piece of the exposure to the public. Sponsors mean more exposure and more exposure creates more interest and round we go again. (Marketing 101)

3. The original spec cars now up for Gold CoDs will have to be worth even more as they will be easily identifiable as genuine by any prospective investors looking for an original and as such the price of $330 to upgrade to gold is insignificant given the investment and time already spent on these cars.

4. The lower graded CoDs will then be reflective of the values and sentiment in those cars and should only be worth their material investment if that.

5. The insurers will have to look at changing their policies and premiums to reflect the values of all new grades of certified cars as it will make it easier for them to value true cars and separating them from the look-a-likes.

6. May be the members should accept it is time to change for the better of the association and to let it grow to its full potential. Open your eyes and see how this can be good for everyone, not just the select few.

Now I have voiced my opinion, I don’t think the club will be accepting of my full financial membership application hey!...............:rolleyes:

“Open up the sheds and let the thunder roar”

[David Towe]

My comments in red below





2. More interest means more exposure, more exposure means public interest and where there is public interest there are sponsors wanting a piece of the exposure to the public. Sponsors mean more exposure and more exposure creates more interest and round we go again. (Marketing 101)
Sponsors??? Are you kidding? Unless you pull an original company forget it! Many of those companies from days gone by don't exist any more.[/I]

3. The original spec cars now up for Gold CoDs will have to be worth even more as they will be easily identifiable as genuine by any prospective investors looking for an original and as such the price of $330 to upgrade to gold is insignificant given the investment and time already spent on these cars. Now if we could just get them to actually run in there right spec that would be worth something. Many cars run with hot engines and wrong size wheels, so does introducing a two tier system clean it up, or allow the lower tier to stray from the rules more?[/I]


6. May be the members should accept it is time to change for the better of the association and to let it grow to its full potential. Open your eyes and see how this can be good for everyone, not just the select few.
[I]Change is definitely needed, but is this the change that's needed?
Now I have voiced my opinion, I don’t think the club will be accepting of my full financial membership application hey!...............:rolleyes: [I]Heck, the club will take anyone's money if you're prepared to part with it.

”

[Bender]

Hi all,

My simple thoughts?

I think it is very open ended and will need everyone affected to help with an adjustment. I strongly don't think replica's are needed at all.
Who would like to see? 6 Torana Marlboro hatchback, 10 Allan Moffat Rx7's and 1 green XD Ford racing :p
I bought a set of Rx3 Simmons wheels and a carby adapter plate off Barry Jones over 15 years ago does that mean I can build a car? I don't think so. but could I part then out into 4 cars?
As for other comments like
Sponsors; you have to run it whether they give you money or not :( no brainer. The only sponsorship you could ever get would be as a category.
Value off cars; Who cares :eek: I don't. It really comes down to how much someone will pay for it. If you are in it for the money we you haven't raced cars, you don't get rich racing cars ;)

[Frank Binding]

Hi Bender
There is a lot more to this than most would realise including a lot of relevent information the establishment would rather you didn't know. Your take on it is about right.

Regards
Frank.:mad:

[Willofan]

They are wise words Frank as there is always more to any judgement that is best not aired.

To Small Bangers & Bender, The rules are clear enough and have never suggested that there could be more replicas:mad: built than the one original car (that would look silly :p), its actually to the contrary. The cars must always be restored or built to the rules to maintain their original DNA, without being hotted up with new technology, bigger wheels and hybrid components.

However there is a lot of wanna bees out there that think they can recreate genuine history from a bucket of parts. The rules if applied correctly should keep them at bay. But at the same time, there are cars in sheds still in sports sedan trim or missing bits and log books or reshelled since there last run that should be given a chance.

I think Sponsorship's should be another Forum topic that could be explored when things come good.

The value of cars, who cares you say! Loose your pride and joy off the trailer on the way home from a days racing and you will soon learn how Insurance Co's will only pay you what they think it is worth, not what someone may have been willing to pay in the good times, the agreed value means nothing. If it is genuine, you should have less of an arguement if it has a gold CofD.

The Debate is healthy and look forward to any more from the viewers and players.

Regards, Willofan :D

[Admin]

However there is a lot of wanna bees out there that think they can recreate genuine history from a bucket of parts. The rules if applied correctly should keep them at bay. But at the same time, there are cars in sheds still in sports sedan trim or missing bits and log books or reshelled since there last run that should be given a chance.
Regards, Willofan :D


Exactly - "The rules if applied correctly should keep them at bay" is what I believe is the key point. The regs are very specific, and if administered properly there should be no issues. Understand that the Association is NOT the one who administers CoD's, that's CAMS job. The graded system would appear on face value to be a compromise effectively saying that the rules have shortcomings that they can't deal with. Fix the rules and/or administer the CoD process correctly should have been the appropriate course of action, rather than to add more complexity.

I'm personally agrieved that on January 1 next year, my CoD'd Escort will most probably be automatically devalued because it will only have a standard grade CoD. To get the gold tick, I have to pay another $330 for CAMS to pull the file from the draw, flick through the pages and go - full ownership history, correct mechanical specs, correct livery - go gold! This is what what I paid them $600 to do three years ago. It's not so much the money, but the principle of the thing. I feel like I'm being held to ransom :mad:

Anyway it's happened and we have to deal with it. This debate is good - keep the opinions coming.

Rgds, Nev

[Bender]

The Debate is healthy and look forward to any more from the viewers and players.



I do think people should discuss it and not take it to heart which can be the case sometimes. I'm only voicing my opinion (Group C) I can't talk Group A not my area.


You don't need 2 types of CofD's really.
If?
My motor doesn't comply? bronze? well if I can get 50+ HP, pay less for a certificate and race in the same race. Another no brainer. Racing is competitive sport and all about reading rules;)

My cars raced as Sport Sedans. I have had to welded in a new tunnel to one car. If it was a Group C car then it always will be, you just need to meet the rules. I thought that is what homoligation and CofD was for? It does not prove it is an original car but it does prove it complies to the rules of the nominated time.

Please join in :)

[David Paterson]

Exactly - "[I]I'm personally agrieved that on January 1 next year, my CoD'd Escort will most probably be automatically devalued because it will only have a standard grade CoD. To get the gold tick, I have to pay another $330 for CAMS to pull the file from the draw, flick through the pages and go - full ownership history, correct mechanical specs, correct livery - go gold! This is what what I paid them $600 to do three years ago. It's not so much the money, but the principle of the thing. I feel like I'm being held to ransom :mad:

Rgds, Nev

Nev, you've hit the nail on the head. This is the greatest flaw of the proposed system. You have already paid full price and proven your car to be eligible for a Gold CofD, why should you pay more? This is what the HC need to address.

[Frank Binding]

Dave
I disagree, the greatest flaw in the new system is that it allows cars with suspect history or even worse, cars that have been reshelled out of the period into the system and as we all know that in the case of touring cars the shell is the car. I believe that the new system very convieniently allows the coverup of some very bad decisions that have been made in the past, and I might add by the very people who should have known better. There I have got it off my chest.

Frank:mad:

[David Paterson]

I disagree, the greatest flaw in the new system is that it allows cars with suspect history or even worse, cars that have been reshelled out of the period into the system

Wow! I didn't know that! I'm shocked! Why on earth would CAMS or the HC want to allow this?

[Frank Binding]

Hi David
Don't feel singled out as it is not in the best interest of the establishment for you to know. The association has fought this for almost two years but it would appear the decision had been made a long time ago. All we got out of it was an ongoing headache and a sore asse.

Regards
Frank:(

[Dylan Innes]

Dave
I disagree, the greatest flaw in the new system is that it allows cars with suspect history or even worse, cars that have been reshelled out of the period into the system and as we all know that in the case of touring cars the shell is the car. I believe that the new system very convieniently allows the coverup of some very bad decisions that have been made in the past, and I might add by the very people who should have known better. There I have got it off my chest.

Frank:mad:


Frank,

What are you thoughts then on a car that is damaged badly enough in a Historic Group C/A race that would then require reshell?

Regards

Dylan

[Chris Bowden]

Hmmmmm.... Too all those people who offered me ID Tags and logbooks over the years. Please come back!! I didn't really mean to tell you to stick them up your dodgy ass!

I can't wait until they release the "Platinum CoD" and how much I can pay for that temporary honour. It will read like the periodic table if they keep this up. I like old Brique and the gang, but this is a bit of a fkn joke????

Dylan, with due respect, I think this whole thread proves that it doesn't matter in the slightest what Frank/Barry/Beach/me/you thinks about a car in those circumstances.

[Frank Binding]

Hi all
You are 100 % correct Chris. Beach, Barry and myself have spent every spare minute over the past 12 years of our lives with the sole aim of gaining 5th catagory recognition for both Groups C and A and providing a set of rules for both catagories that were iron tight without loopholes. After having spent hundreds of hours collectively we came up with what we thought was the best result possible CAMS felt that they were too hard to inforce so as to make their job easier they introduced the mechanical upgrade clause which effectivley put most competing cars out of specification. Then in their wisdon they required that the rules be tightened up to bring cars back to their correct specification, the association was approached by the HC to help redraft the rules and guess what, the original set was reintroduced almost completley as they were with the addition of a very specific clause regarding the reshelling of cars all of which was accepted by the HC.The disapointing aspect of the Graded Cof D is that it effectivley allows the HC to overturn or should I say overlook any relevent information regarding the eligability or provinence of vehicles, leading to the acceptance of vehicles with less than desirable provinance or eligability. In the late ninetys if CAMS had their way both groups C and A, had it not been for the persistance of the Group C Touring Car Association would have been consigned to back yard sheds and the scrap heap. I really don,t know why we wasted our time when after all our hard work with and for CAMS, the graded Cof D system effectivley gives the HC the authority to overide the current rules if and when it suits them.

:mad:
Frank

[bent65]

IMHO: This is indeed the greatest flaw Frank and by allowing the suspect/just reshelled cars into the system it will not only confuse and short change the spectators/enthusiasts/promoters but will have the situation of having replica cars that are easily rebuilt, racing against irreplaceable cars! This I would have thought is against the whole idea and Preamble of Group C/A. Who yields when a 'just built' Falcon and a genuine GTR Skyline arrive at a corner together?
If the Falcon, (that was built around a steering column out of 'BillyBobs 1983 Bathurst Falcon') hits the fence and takes the GTR with it, he wheels out one of the other shells he has out the back and comes back next week! His log book already reads "reshelled" so it has no or little affect to him. The skyline is irreplaceable.
I cant speak for the drivers in Group C/A but in Group N there are people that have huge differences in respect for other people and is usually reflected in the condition of their car after a race meeting! Maybe not yet but with these 'new' cars and higher profile will come new drivers and budgets/desperation.
It seems insane to force this change on an Association that was founded specifically avoiding this exact scenario. One size doesnt fit all and if the open wheeler guys want this system then great for them. If you have an ex-group C sports sedan then restore it back detailing the restoration completely. If it is too far modified to do so then you have answered the question of eligibilty! The graded CofD was probably begun to adjust the line in the sand between what is 'genuine' or not but it has become an almost removal of the line. I dont know when a car is no longer original or not but in the case of touring cars Franks suggestion seems reasonable.
I remember reading a CAMS schpeel a while ago about how Australias historic cars are the most impeccably genuine cars in the world and now the cars provenence no longer has to bee 100% proven. As a spectator this 'genuine cars racing' is the whole reason this Category is appealing. This can only be seen as a step backwards!!!

It does feel good to get it off your chest!

[john mccarthy]

As an original co/constructer of several group c cars in the 70,s and 80,s i am i am horrified that the public (race fans) ARE ABOUT TO BE RIPPED OFF by people perporting to have every ones intrests at heart. i will fight as hard as i can to discredit any person or persons who try to present replica,s as the genuine artical. if the line of heritage cant be proven it aint the car , i would hope all of the many engineers/mechanics who busted their guts to create these treasures will support me , get out of the sport if you cant respect it.

John McCarthy

[Frank Binding]

:mad:John
You have hit the nail on the head but our biggest problem is not the people trying to pull the wool over our eyes by building a car around an original bolt but the people in the commission who make the decisions which allow and support the deciept.You watch, if these cars are allowed to be recognised many authentic cars will be consigned back into sheds and that will make the deciept even worse. As you would know we have been fighting this for almost three years now and given many assurances along the way but it would appear that the decision was made by the HC about two years ago. How do you fight this sort of behavior when the people who are supposed to be protecting these cars are the ones supporting the deciept.

Frank.:mad:

[Rowan Harman]

Dave
I disagree, the greatest flaw in the new system is that it allows cars with suspect history or even worse, cars that have been reshelled out of the period into the system and as we all know that in the case of touring cars the shell is the car. I believe that the new system very convieniently allows the coverup of some very bad decisions that have been made in the past, and I might add by the very people who should have known better. There I have got it off my chest.

Frank:mad:

What about cars with fully documented history, re-shelled in the period?

Chuck.

[john mccarthy]

Frank . i don,t recall seeing any of these chaps hanging over the fence holding out lap boards ,or eating cold hamburgers,washed down with hot coke at 3.00am fixing battle damaged cars so we could run the next day . as i said i will fight these fools and support the real owners of these wonderful cars,


John McCarthy

[David Towe]

Have you ever picked up a brand new road car from the dealer, and on the way home you've remembered you need to buy some milk. Do you remember how you felt when you've reversed the car into the supermarket car park and then realised that you've parked beside a $1200 shit box and said to yourself "the milk can wait"?

Now ask yourself this question, do I really want to race against a replica? I certainly wouldn't. I'm thinking boycott!!!, no, not Geoffrey Boycott, is it workable?

In case it fails, does anyone know if there are any more taxis for sale in Benalla? I might be able to save a few dollars.

[john mccarthy]

Chuck ,as we both know we had no time to repair cars , most teams had only one or two guys to spanner on these cars ,supported by mates .so re shelling was a real option. unfortuanatly the people at our C.A.M.S are only administrators and have little knowledge of the grass root activities of the day and most appear to have hidden agendas maybe looking for their 15 minutes of glory WATCH OUT 4 THE GROUP C NATZIES JMC

[David Towe]

WATCH OUT 4 THE GROUP C NATZIES JMC


????:confused::confused:

[bent65]

As an original co/constructer of several group c cars in the 70,s and 80,s i am i am horrified that the public (race fans) ARE ABOUT TO BE RIPPED OFF by people perporting to have every ones intrests at heart. i will fight as hard as i can to discredit any person or persons who try to present replica,s as the genuine artical. if the line of heritage cant be proven it aint the car , i would hope all of the many engineers/mechanics who busted their guts to create these treasures will support me , get out of the sport if you cant respect it.

John McCarthy

You have picked up on the pivoting point of the whole debate John. It seems to be the new wording for eligibility is now that, the car doesnt have to have proven heritage (provenence) as you say, but but simply the 'confidence' of the eligibility officer and then the opinions of the powers at CAMS (however they get formed). It would seem a good idea to involve people such as yourself to present information with relation to cars they were involved with back in the day. I hope the deciding people can remain true to the category now that the 100% proven part is gone!

[Frank Binding]

cars reshelled within the period are OK but can only maintane the identity prior to the accident, no further back.

[john mccarthy]

The sad thing is that since Brocks demise ,the rusty old torana or commodore in the back yard that might cost a $30.00 tipping fee may realize a $500.000 profit if we can convince people that he drove it .imagine if you purchased one . money was never peters motivation . i recall going out to dinner with him at easterncreek ,not the ritz but black town la porceta , the waitres gasped and cried out" your PETER BROCK" pete smiled and said is that ok? am i allowed to be? great guy ,wouldn,t appreciate knuckle heads with no style exploiting his success.

[Rowan Harman]

cars reshelled within the period are OK but can only maintane the identity prior to the accident, no further back.

Why no further back? Reasoning? Would a re-shell not replace the identity prior to the re-shell anyway? Splitting hairs! What if a clear line of history can be provided and is acceptable (world wide) like in all of the other Historic category's? What if the re-shell is part of a rebuild? What is the difference to a car being re-shelled due to crash damage post CoD?

[Willofan]

While Frank is close to the CAMS decision to comment on this graded COD system, the technical questions you are asking should be directed to CAMS and their arbitrators as the Grp C Assoc. no longer has much of a say on what is accepted as a reshell and what will not qualify. This is the biggest gripe the senior association guys have with this new system as they no longer have any power of address.

In all of my research on the surface of this new system, there is no mention of reshells in or outside of the period being accepted, however as Frank has suggested and I am sure lurking under the surface is un-written rules and exceptions that will be considered if you create enough smoke and mirrors to baffle the experts. Again, this goes against the foundations of Grp C Assoc.

Like you, I am keen to know if a reshell in period will be accepted and how far back you can go. My project started life as a Grp C car reshelled in period and run again as Grp C till the end of this category and then ended up as Grp A with a chequered history and I will be presenting my case to the CAMS officials down the track when I have the funds to finish it. I think the best I can hope for is a Grp A car when it last ran very uncompetitively in 1988. Other than that I am no expert and not prepared to speculate on what will happen until CAMS review my case.

As I said early on in this thread, there are plenty of examples of true cars that may have had category changes in racing career to keep circulating on a race track with broken history and un-recorded changes of ownership (ie; poker night wins with no exchange of reciepts or log books and not new body shells afterwards and rebuilt with new technology etc) that have been tucked away in sheds with current owners not able to get them recognised until now. I do hope this new system allows these cars come back to life as deserving examples of their former glory and run against the best of them.

Please keep the emotions and speculation out of this thread and use it to let CAMS know the assoc. must have a say in the recognition process!! I really don't think Brocky is rolling in his place of rest over all of this, as he was always just happy to see the cars and drivers entertain the crowds at any venue, he was a showman first then racing driver second and bloody good at both.

Rgds, WILLOFAN

"Open up the Sheds and let the thunder roar" :rolleyes:

[David Towe]

If you're monitoring this thread, how about asking ALL of those affected by this ridiculous decision what their thoughts are? All of the owners of these cars are affected by your decisions in many, many ways. Get serious about protecting our genuine motorsport heritage and don't just do something half-arsed to be seen to be doing something in order to protect your positions within an organising body, because that's the way it looks at the moment to some.

[Bill Cutler]

Gents -

I would like to correct some of the comments in this discussion - as some of you know I am the Historic Touring Car representative on the Historic Commission, and I have both a Grp N and a Grp A car.

1) The Commission's position is that Replica's or Recreations are NOT welcome in Historics in Australia. For touring cars, there is no change to the policy that the provenance - the full line of ownership and history - should always be proven.

2) The mechanical specification MUST be correct for the car's nominated event. Our eligibility officers thoroughly research every new CofD application to ensure that this is the case. I know there are reports of cars running "incorrect" parts - if this is the case then evidence should be provided to the EO's so that changes can be made.

3) Cars reshelled within the period, which may have continued in competition, and now applying for CofD will need to be supported by detailed information about the damaged or replaced shell as part of the overall history of the car.
These cars would only be considered for a Gold or Standard CofD provided they meet all the criteria as currently applied.

4) Cars reshelled out of the period will be considered only on a case by case basis. The damaged or replaced shell MUST be able to be accounted for. Generally, a continuous race history, even if it is in subsequent categories, will need to be shown. Our EO's are a highly skilled group - please respect their knowledge in these areas. These cars will not necessarily/automatically be considered for Conditional CofD's just because an application has been made.

5) Upgrades from Std to Gold CofD. I agree it seems unfair to charge $330 if you want to upgrade your existing CofD, given that our cars, by virtue of the rules written by "the elders" should already be in the correct livery. The fee was set more with reference to open wheelers, where the EO's there would need to be involved in the upgrade process. Let me see if I can change this fee for Touring Cars at the next Historic Commission meeting in September.

Please contact me if you wish to discuss these issues further.

Bill Cutler bcutler@bigpond.com 0407.337600

[Rowan Harman]

Originally Posted by Frank Binding
Dave
I disagree, the greatest flaw in the new system is that it allows cars with suspect history or even worse, cars that have been reshelled out of the period into the system and as we all know that in the case of touring cars the shell is the car. I believe that the new system very convieniently allows the coverup of some very bad decisions that have been made in the past, and I might add by the very people who should have known better. There I have got it off my chest.

Frank


Moderators. This post has been attributed to me. I think it is from Frank Binding. May I add that he has valid points but i don't wish this post to be attributed to me.

CCR

[bent65]

Gents -

.
[QUOTE]
1) The Commission's position is that Replica's or Recreations are NOT welcome in Historics in Australia. For touring cars, there is no change to the policy that the provenance - the full line of ownership and history - should always be proven.

Bill, Are you able to post or quote the Commissions position regarding the full line of ownership and competition history , both prior to and after this CoD change? I thought originally the full line of ownership had to be unbroken and history 100% proven prior to the existance of a this tiered system?
Now that a 'qualified' CoD exists, accepting less than 100% proof, it appears this is a softening of the eligibility process and a definite change in position? I am of the understanding that the eligibilty process is now more about peoples (however accurate) opinion than about proven fact, with regard to dubious cars.
It may put people at ease if you could point out clearer that CAMS position hasnt changed , if indeed it hasnt? Does the Commission have a written position or guidelines for assessing a car outside what we can read in the CoD Application or Manual?
Sorry to quiz you Bill but you may be a position to set a few things straight for us.

[bent65]

Sorry to bang on but found this matrix on this link to the CAMS site. It shows that "cars with incomplete history" will be considered. Has this always been the case with Group C or is this a change in position.
I think the answer to this will be where the devil is. IN THE DETAIL!

http://www.cams.com.au/Sport/Historics/Logbooks%20and%20COD.aspx

[Bill Cutler]

Thanks for the query, "bent65", sorry it's taken so long to reply, we had the HC meeting and CAMS Summit last weekend, and of course MCM before that..

The Qualified CoD will NOT be applied to Grp C and A touring cars.

The purpose of the qualified CoD is to allow cars such as Lola Sports 2000 or Formula Fords which were built by a recognised race car manufacturer in limited production runs. These cars were often raced in USA and parts of their competition or ownership history may be missing. However they are easily recognised as genuine cars from chassis numbers and factory production records. It is not always possible in some cases to fill in the gaps in the history, but it was felt that these cars should be allowed to race in their period category.

This doesn't apply to Grp C/A, where the fact that the provenance must be proven is still a requirement. The graded system will in fact only have two levels for us - the existing "standard" CoD and the Gold CoD. Grp C/A cars should already be in the exact period correct livery (for the specified event) and therefore should be eligible for upgrade from std to gold CoD, subject to Eligibility Committee approval.

The Commissioners and the chairmen of the eligibility committees have recently spent considerable time framing guidelines for the graded system for all cars, and particularly to cover the possible scenario's for new C/A applications. These guidelines will be published soon - as soon as they are finalised I'll post up the appropriate link...

Hope this helps

Cheers

Bill

[bent65]

Bill,
At this stage that sounds like great news! If what you say is correct then the qualification for groups C and A will again require that the provenance is 100% proven. It looks like all the hard work form our Committee members for the last however many years has been well worth it. Well done to those guys for having the puff to protect the cars and Association from being dilluted!! And I guess the people wanting the graded system for their categories can keep it. This is from what I understand what our committee has been seeking all along. A win for common sense?

Thanks Bill for your work also and communicating the position of CAMS.

Regards Ben.

[David Towe]

Yep, thanks Bill

[Chris Bowden]

Good on you Bill. That's great news. A relief actually.

OK...Forget what I said earlier; Everyone can re-insert their dodgy ID tags and logbooks right up their clackers again!