Protest No. 1: 1953 XK-120 FHC - Carpet Cutouts for the Clutch and Brake Stems.

Concours d'Elegance at Jaguar Club of Ohio, Ursuline College, August 5, 2006 -

A contestant was penalized 0.5 points for non-authentic carpet openings for the clutch and brake stems on the firewall. The openings on the carpet were slits from the stems to the floor. The contestant was advised that the carpet openings for the stems should have been holes, not slits.

The contestant had no documentation to prove that slits for clutch and brake stems on the XK-120 were correct.

A majority of the Protest Committee ruled to deny the protest, and the deduction of 0.5 points stands.

We further checked with numerous restorers, and they were unanimous that the carpet openings for the XK-120 should be holes and not slits.

Protest Committee Report - 2005 

Of the six protests received and considered for concours season of 2005, four were resolved at the local level and two were ruled upon by the committee.

Protest No. 1 - 2005, 1951 MKV

At the Jaguar Drivers' Club of Long Island Concours d'Elegance, June 26, 2005, a 1951 MKV DHC was penalized 1.0 point for Turn Signals, Front, Rear and Sides. There were no initials by the entrant and the Non-Authentic Items were not identified or described. The entrant was not offered "courtesy repair time". The Chief Judge returned the 1.0 point.

Protest No. 2 - 2005, 1986 XJS

At the Virginia Jaguar Club of Richmond, September 18, 2005, a 1986 XJ6 was penalized 1.0 point for Missing or Non-Authentic Items. The score sheet was improperly filled out. The Chief Judge returned the 1.0 point to entrant's score.

Protest No. 3 - 2005, 1989 XJS

At the Nation's Capital Owners' Club, September 11, 2005, a 1989 XJS was penalized 2.0 for Pin Stripes and Initials and 0.3 point for touch-u and chip repair. A majority of the committee ruled that initials are not allowed, but pin stripes are allowed. A NEWS Announcement from Jaguar (and a black and white photograph of an '89 XJS showing pin stripes) with a quote as follows: "Jaguar announces 1989 XJS V12 Coupe with a number of styling and equipment improvements….and distinctive new coach stripes in colors complementing the car color". The committee ruled that 1.0 point be returned to entrant's score for the pin stripes. The 0.3 point deduction was minimal and appropriate for a well-done touch-up. The total deduction from entrant's score was 1.3 points.

Protest No. 4 - 2005, 1970 E-type

A 1970 E-Type was penalized 4.0 points for a missing tool kit. Discussed Chapter VI, page 9, and Chapter V, page 9, of the Rules Book which specify that tool kits were optional on post-1968 Jaguars, with the Concours Chief Judge and JCNA Chief Judge. Concours Chief Judge returned entrant's points.

Protest No. 5 - 2005, 1964 MKII

A 1964 MKII at the JOC Southwest Regional Concours at San Luis Opisbo on October 9, 2005, was penalized 1.5 point for Missing or Non-Authentic Items (Air conditioner and spare tire) and 1.0 for O.V. Non-Authentic Items, which could not be identified, as it was illegible. Initials were also missing. Concours Chief Judge returned the 2.5 points.

Protest No. 6 - 2005, 1995 XJR

A 1995 XJR at the Inland Empire Jaguar Club concours on October 31, 2005, was penalized a total of 4.8 points. Entrant contended score sheet was improperly filled out because none of the deductions or locations was described. He referenced Rule Book, Edition 8.2, Chapter III, page 12, and requested his points be returned. The committee ruled that the Rule Book specifies notation and description of major cleanliness and/or condition discrepancies, and since none of the deductions exceeded 0.3 point for any one item, the deductions were minimal and did not warrant further explanation. The deduction of 4.8 points stands.

Protest Committee Report - 2004

There have been five protests to date. Four have been ruled upon and the fifth is in the works. Here are the decisions on the first four protests:

Protest No. 1 - 2004: 1962 3.8 E-Type Radiator

Concours Jaguar Society of SC Lowcountry Classic Jaguar Concours, May 1, 2004: A contestant received a 2.40 point deduction for a non-authentic radiator. He agrees that his car does not have an authentic radiator, however, even though several vendors offer a close replica, he contends that they are not truly authentic, and that there are no authentic radiators available for his 1962 3.8 E-Type. He also argues that in the same C5 Class, 1965 - 1967 4.2
Series 1 E-Types do not possess this handicap. Authentic replacement radiators are readily available for the 4.2.

The contestant¹s argument is that an original 3.8 aluminum radiator cannot be repaired to a reasonably usable condition, and is requesting that his 2.40 points be returned.

The protest was denied, the 2.40 point deduction stands. Some comments from the committee:

1. Radiators have not been considered an expendable item, and there are many cars competing with original radiators.

2. An ³absolutely original² radiator could be accomplished by repairing the original at a considerable cost.

3. Poor availability or high cost of quality parts has never been a reason for defining what is original. It actually separates the good cars from the excellent ones.

Protest No. 2-2004: 1963 E OTS, Class C-5, Mechanical Judging Procedures.

A contestant filed a protest regarding the judging procedures at the subject concours. He stated that a mechanical judge in Class C-5 judged his own car entered in that class. He requested the disqualification of the entire class C-5 in the subject concours. Because of the complicated circumstances surrounding this protest, I took it upon myself to present it to the Executive Board of JCNA for their review. Taking into consideration their comments and recommendations, and the decision of a majority of the Protest Committee members, the following rulings have been made:

1. The score of the judge who was a member of the mechanical judging team, and whose car was entered in Class C-5, will not be allowed. The points he received for this concours will not be considered for local or national recognition.

2. The remainder of Class C-5 scores will remain in effect.

3. The Executive Board of JCNA has taken the appropriate steps with the club in question to assure that this oversight does not happen in the future.

Protest No. 3-2004: 1991 XJS, Class C-15, Unreasonable Deductions on Chrome Rocker Panels/Covers.

A contestant was penalized 12.0 points for non-authentic two-tone pattern or color on the Rocker Panels. The Chief Judge reduced the deduction to 3.0 points per side, or 6.0 points total. The contestant protested this deduction and requested his penalty be changed to 0.6 points per side, for a total of 1.2 points. A majority of the Protest Committee voted to deny the protest and accept the decision of the Chief Judge. The deduction of 6.0 points stands.

Protest No. 4-2004: 1969 Series II E 2+2, Class C-6: Exhaust Manifolds Finish.

A contestant was marked down 6.0 points for wrong finish on the exhaust manifolds of his car. His finish is black enamel, and the judges contended they should be porcelainized. The contestant believed the manifold finish is correct and requested the return of the 6.0 point deduction. A majority of the Protest Committee voted to deny the protest. At the last AGM, the JCNA Series II E-Type Judge¹s Guide was approved by the membership, and by approving, it¹s use is mandatory. (See page 13 of the Judge¹s Guide). The committee members based their decisions on this guide. The deduction of 6.0 stands.

Seven protests were considered by the Protest Committee during the 2003 Concours d¹Elegance year. Following is a synopsis of the protests and the committee¹s ruling on each:

Protest No. 1: Air Rail Piping Finish on 1974 XKE Series III, JCNA Challenge Championship, May 4, 2003, Phoenix, AZ.

A contestant received a 2.4 penalty on the finish of the air rail piping on his 1974 Series III at the JCNA Challenge Championship in Phoenix on May 4, 2003. He sought the committee¹s opinion on the di-chromate plating and finish and the return of 2.4 points to his score.

A majority of the Protest Committee ruled that the protest be denied. The 2.4 point deduction stands. Those in the majority were of the opinion that the finish on the rails, brackets and bolts were beautiful, but too highly polished and ultra shiny to be the proper original finish.

Protest No. 2: Exterior Judging on 1952 XK 120 FHC at Jaguar Club of Tulsa Concour d¹Elegance 09-13-03 - Class C-16.

A contestant received 0.9 penalty on the exterior of his Jaguar. The contestant believed that there was insufficient lighting, and he was judged unfairly on the following:

Body, Doors & Bonnet - Dents/ Ripple 0.2
Paint Finish - Cleanliness 0.2
Chromework - Dents/Ripples 0.1
Pits/Rust 0.2
Cleanliness 0.2
Total 0.9

The Protest Committee was unanimous in their decision that the protest be denied, and the 0.9 penalty stands. Some comments from the committee were: All cars in the class were judged under the same conditions, and although the judging process is not ideal, no rule was broken. The judge was reporting what he saw. The Concour Chairman and the Chief Judge verified that these deductions were justified.

Protest No. 3 1962 MK II:

Deduction for Non-Authentic Items, ³Beauty Rings² (Rimbellishers) , Class D-5, Concours d¹Elegance on 09-02-03 at Sun Coast Jaguar Club, Memorial Jag Fest, International Mall, Tampa, Florida. The judge contended that the Rimbellishers were installed at the factory and deducted 0.8 for ³Non-Authentic². The contestant stated that Rimbellishers are optional equipment. The Protest Committee was unanimous in their decision that Rimbellishers are optional, and the 0.8 deduction be returned to the score.

Protest No. 4: Non-Authentic Carpet in 1969 E-Type FHC, Concours d¹Elegance held 08-30-03 at Portland, Oregon. The contestant was penalized 16.8 points for Non-Authentic Carpet. The contestant had British Wilton Wool instead of Flocked Carpet. A majority (5 out of 7) of the Protest Committee ruled that the protest be denied. The deduction of 16.8 points stands. Those in the majority were of the opinion that as the rules are now written, Flocked Carpet is correct, and carpet is not an expendable item. Therefore Wilton Wool carpet is non-authentic.

Protest No. 5: Tire Size on 1972 Series III E-Type, Jaguar Club of Central Arizona Concours d¹Elegance, November 15, 2003, Class 18. A contestant received a 6.8 point deduction for 5 Dunlop Elite P215/70R15 tires. The contestant believed the ER70VR15 tires were no longer available and requested the points be returned. A majority of the Protest Committee ruled that the protest be denied, agreeing that the tires were the wrong size, and the correct size tire is available.

Protest No. 6: 1967 XKE OTS, Jaguar Touring Club¹s 20th Annual Concours d¹Elegance, October 4, 2003, Championship Class 05. Contestants protest they were marked down on Exterior, Body, Doors and Bonnet (including jams, sills, shut/hinge faces) for Rust 0.1, and marked down for Cleanliness 0.1 for Hardware, Steering Wheel and Instruments. A majority of the Protest Committee ruled that the protest be denied, and the 0.2 point deduction stands. Once again the committee is being asked to second-guess a judge after the fact. The judge reported what he observed, and his decision is final.

Protest No. 7: 1973 E-Type, Jaguar Club of Central Arizona Concours d¹Elegance, November 15, 2003. A contestant believed the deductions
received at this event were excessive:

1. No initial for non-authentic deduction for wrong size tires: 5.0
2. Deduct for having one horn. Contestant states both were working, they were same tone. 5.0
3. Poor fit on passenger door: 2.0
4. Paint Over-spray 3.0
5. Dent in Right Hubcap 2.0
6. Headlight Bezel, pits and poor chrome: 2.0
7. Poor Rubber Components: 2.0

There were 14.8 other deducts that weren¹t challenged.

The Protest Committee ruled that 5.0 points for wrong size tires be returned to contestant¹s score due to mistake by judge. Deduction for horns should have been 1.0, therefore 4.0 points to be returned. (Chapter VI, page 6-8, of the Official JCNA Concours d¹Elegance Rules shows the proper deduct for this item). The deduction for paint over-spray is reduced to 1.5, and 1.5 points returned to the score. A total of 10.5 points were returned to the contestant¹s score. The committee ruled that the remainder of the deductions were reasonable.

As of this date there have been five protests filed and ruled upon in the year 2002. One protest was not considered because it was filed beyond the 45-day limit.

Protest No. 1 - 1970 XKE :

Entrant said he was entered in Class 6 and should have been entered in Class 15 His tool kit was displayed and judged as is proper in Class 6. He asked for points back, because in Class 15 the tool kit is optional. The President, Concours Chairman and Chief Judge records show he paid for and was entered in Class 6.

Protest denied Deduction remains 6.5 points.

Protest No. 2 1991 XJS D-8:

Entrant believed he was treated harshly on his with excessive point deductions for non-authenticity, Steering heel: 23 points, Chrome Wheel arch trim 22: points, Body Side Moldings 24: points. In the non-authentic box there was only one initial that could be identified. The Committee adjusted the deduction to: Steering Wheel 6.0 points and no deduction for Chrome arch trim, and body side moldings.

Protest No. 3 - 1976 XJ12C C11:

Entrant was marked down for having a NARDI Steering Wheel. Requested points returned because he had never been penalized in the past. Protest denied. Deduction remains 6.0 points

.

Protest No. 4 -For a 1954 XK-120 Class -18 :

Entrant ask for points to be returned that were marked ³non-authentic² and initialed: New Seats, Door Panels and Carpets. The Concours Chairman and a judge verified the materials were new. While checking on this, it was determined that only 2 judges were used to judge this class. Protest denied, the scores in this concours for this class cannot be used for Regional or National competition.

The Protest Committee was unanimous in their decisions on No. 1, 2, 3 and 4.

Protest No. 5 - 1974 XKE Series III:

Entrant was marked down for a grayish-green fuel tank color. The judge said it should be black. A majority of the Protest Committee ruled that some of the gas tanks could have been grayish- green in color. His 2.0 points were returned.

6(a) - Under ³Interior²: Woodwork, Vinyl & Leather - 0.5 points for fading, peeling, worn finish on the left rear door. Seats, Squabs & Belts: 0.2
points for poor fit/wrinkled rear seat. The entrant contended there was no cause for the deduction. The concours chairman and judge involved said there was indeed a problem.

Under ³Interior²: Door Panels & Arm Rests: The judge identified ³Tools in the door - rust, corrosion, pits, dents² and deducted 0.2 points. The
entrant contended the tool kit should have been judged under ³Tool Kit² on page 3 of the score sheet. No deductions were taken under ³Tool Kit² category, and it was clearly marked ³Tools in the door² under the ³Interior² category.

A majority of the Protest Committee ruled the Protest be denied and the deductions stand.

6(b) - Under ³Interior²: Door Panels & Arm Rests: 0.2 points were deducted for dried polish/wax residue in hinge area of right front door. The entrant contended this should have been judged under ³Paint Finish² on page 2 of the score sheet. The concour chairman said they designate which judge (³Exterior² or ³Interior²) shall judge the hinge area. Again, they were not judged twice. The Committee was unanimous in their decision that the Protest be denied and deductions stand.

This entrant filed one other protest which exceeded the 45-day limit which is stated in the Official JCNA Concours d¹Elegance Rules.

Protest No. 7- 1955 XK-140 MC OTS:

Entrant protested two items:

1. A deduction of 2.0 on color of mounting plate (body color or black) for the bonnet catch. A majority of the Protest Committee ruled the plate
should be body color as described in the 34th AGM JCNA XK-140 Bulletin, 1992. Deduction remains.

2. A 1.0 deduction was made for the color of the engine head between the cam covers and the exhaust manifold. A majority of the Committee ruled that the color should be engine head color. Point returned.

Protest No. 8: Entrant protested 1.0 on fading of the interior on his 1989 XJS Class D-8. The entrant believed that this was incorrect, since his
interior was only three years old. The Committee was unanimous in their decision that the score cannot be changed if a rule was not broken. The judge¹s decision is final. The deduction stands.

Protest Committee Report - 2001

Protest Committee Report - 2000

Protest Committee Report - 1999

Protest Committee Report 1998