Q1.Inland revenue says certificate of insurance proves ownership of vehicle...Is this true?

Question

Q2. Have proof of transfer of assets under a private agreement...inland revenue says this isn't legally binding as wasn't done through high court...is this true? They have sent this url which refers to 'bill of rights' ...our agreement is settlement of debt, not holding ownership unless debt is paid...are they right? http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/recmanual/rec2505.htm

Answer 1

on question 2 they are probably right

on question 1, insurance doesn't prove proof of ownership of a vehicle, you can be insured to drive any vehicle if it belongs to you or not. Proof of ownership would be the vehicle log book which would be issued by DVLA. Look at it this way, when the police check to see if a car has been stolen, they get their information from DVLA.

Answer 2

1) I would not have thought so .. for sure my Company Car was insured by the Company I worked for but was actually owned by the Lease/Hire Company (I know because I paid them to buy it at the end of 3 years)....

... however in the absence of any other evidence, 'who insures it' would be a good indication of 'who owns it' (after all, why would you insure something you don't own ??)

What does DVLA say about it ? (i.e. who's name is the vehicle registered in ?)

2) If you have a legal bill of sale, then the ownership rights of the seller have be transferred to you.

So the only questions is - did the seller have legal ownership of the vehicle they sold OR have you been sold stolen goods ?

For example, did ownership pass to the Inland Revenue (as part of some deal involving payment of Taxes etc) BEFORE the vehicle was sold to you ?

.. or was the Vehicle part of the assets of some-one (or some Company) that was made Bankrupt ? (= if so, ownership would have passed to the Official Receiver when they were made Bankrupt - and any sale would indeed have to go through the courts ..)

Answer 3

Q1. This is obviously untrue. The last time I hired a car for a day I had to insure it to comply with Road Traffic Acts. Many people take out insurance on assets they do not have legal title to. The only restriction with taking out an insurance polisy is that you must have an "insurable interest". This will stop me taking accident insurance on Beckham's legs, for example.

Q2. The link you provided refers to assets which have supposedly been sold but have not been paid for and the original owner is retaining the goods until the whole of the purchase price is paid. You need to prove that you have paid for the vehicle by extinguishing a pre-existing debt.

You are presumably allowing the original owner to still use the vehicle. Why? Are you leasing it to him? If so, you should have proper documentary evidence of this. If not, has any money changed hands for the use of the vehicle?

You will need to establish a sale and leaseback if you are to overturn the Revenue's presumption that this is just a wheeze to put the vehicle beyond their reach.

Answer 4

Yes they are correct. The reason is to prevent bogus transfer of assets to avoid tax or distraint (seizing of goods against a debt) for tax N.I. etc. or in bankruptcy.

P.S. Sorry forgot Q1

Certificate of insurance in your name proves control and therefore ownership for their purposes. It makes no difference that in otherv areas of the law this would not necessarily apply.