Could this be a sandman - Chassis swap

[HK1837]

This is exactly what I have been trying get into oxbox's head.

He is confusing the legal unique identity of a vehicle with its identity as a collectable vehicle as a whole.

His statement was...
It has had a chassis swap so it is no longer a Sandman.

what he should of said was...

It has had a Chassis swap therefore not considered as collectable as a 100% Sandman.

He can never provide legal proof of his statement because a "The Model of a vehicle" is not a legal entity. His interpenetration of ADR compliance is all the proof he has offered to the debate and then refuses to highlight the clause that says that "it clearly shows........".

Ozbox, About my van, yes it has the wrong chassis. As you point out, I have been open about that and it does motivate my cause but that is not evidence to back up any of your claims which is what we are debating as adults here. It might make you feel a bit bigger to get one up on me but really..........come on....... how old are you? This isn't kindergarten.

I would suggest that if your van was going to undergo a restoration that you search high and low (including Oz's yard) for a chassis with a number close to yours (like if yours was BHZ12345A then try to find at least another BHZxxxxxA from a ute or van). Then restore it, but don't spend the earth on it as it will always be held back in value compared to a chassis numbers matching vehicle. My opinion is that a fully restored HZ Sandman van done to concours level is probably worth $40k. One done to a quality level but done sensibly (like using repro or incorrect but useable parts) is probably worth $25k. One done the same but without its original chassis is probably worth $13k. All just my opinion (forget actual values, but the relative values is what i'm getting at).
And given that Civil case I was referring to, a vehicle with a changed chassis is a problem when advertising. You couldn't advertise it as a Sandman. You'd have to call it something like "Used to be a matching numbers Sandman until chassis rails were replaced" or similar.

In the end I don't think Oz is telling you it isn't a Sandman once the rails are replaced. What he is trying to get across is that over-capitalising on a non-matching numbers vehicle is a potential folly. The identity of the vehicle changes with a change in chassis, in the extreme case a Holden van put on a Landcruiser chassis becomes a Landcruiser. If you put a Holden van on a ute chassis it effectively becomes a ute, although this is obviously a silly situation (aside, not sure how this would apply to a HK-HG ute or van where the chassis number is on the firewall and remains there after Landcruiser rails fitted?). I suppose the best way to say it is the identity of the vehicle is governed by the chassis. The description may not be - like the van body on the ute chassis, or a HQ coupe body on a WB Statesman chassis. RTA will still call the shape PANEL VAN or COUPE. It is very hard to call a HZ Sandman a HZ Sandman when the rego papers say it is a HQ, and the only places this really matters is:
1. In the vehicle value (resale and insurance).
2. If you sell it as a Sandman and someone sues you using the recent Victorian precedent for false advertising.

If you follow what I'd do at the top of this reply I reckon you'd have more chance of it being worth more, but still the value would take a significant hit without the original chassis.