Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Ex's mother signed the car over to me, now she want it back!?

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Stavros Murphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Stavros Murphy


    EmilieStiletto wrote: »
    It's Ford ka 1999.

    Give it back. Deffo.

    Not for any legal reason, just, well, it's a ford ka.


  • Options
    #33
    fineso.mom
    Registered Users Posts: 1,090 ✭✭✭fineso.mom


    Ask her if she has ever heard the expression 'Indian giver'.


  • Options
    #34
    Spook_ie
    Registered Users Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭Spook_ie


    AFAIK the log book doesn't transfer ownership only the registered keeper, otherwise you'd have to put every new car brought on HP into the HP companies name on the log book until paid up.

    Did happen once to my brothers in the UK years ago when the insurance company tried to wrangle their way out of paying because the registered keeper was one brother but the actual owner was the other, took a while to sort out but was accepted that ownership and registration were two different things

    EDIT UK police position explained here
    http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/faq-answer?id=Q743

    2nd EDIT
    Dept of Transport Tourism and Sport Position goes the other way, interested how HP companies can therefore assert ownership over a vehicle?
    http://www.transport.ie/roads/motortax/?loc=2468#Change_of_Vehicle_Ownership


  • Options
    #35
    aaakev
    Registered Users Posts: 3,088 ✭✭✭aaakev


    This is ireland sure, we always side with the banks!


  • Options
    #36
    Cee-Jay-Cee
    Registered Users Posts: 12,235 ✭✭✭✭Cee-Jay-Cee


    Anan1 wrote: »
    Just to be clear, they're separate things. It would have been necessary for the car to be registered in your name for you to insure it, but this wouldn't necessarily make it yours. Did she tell you that you could keep the car, that it belonged to you?

    The VLC is used to transfer OWNERSHIP which makes the car the OP's. If there was some agreement or understanding with the OPs mother in law that she was just lending her the car then that should have been expressed at the time which it wasn't. The car was given to the OP because it wasn't being used. The OP spent a considerable amount of money to get the car roadworthy.

    She can ask all she wants but you can ignore it OP. She hasn't a leg to stand on, she can threaten to sue you but a solicitor would most likely advise her that she has no grounds to sue and even if she does sue all you have to do is wait until it gets a court date (in which time it will have cost her quite a bit in solicitors fees) and simply give her back the car and case can be deemed settled but it will never come to that. She's being a bitch and it's as simple as that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Tails142
    Registered Users Posts: 2,105 ✭✭✭Tails142


    I would give the car back.

    You carried out some repairs, 800 isn't anything major to spend on a car and what you had done was probably just cosmetic or preventative.

    You were getting use of the car the whole time so it seems only right that you would maintain during this period.

    Guess what op, the car came with the boyfriend, you can't have one and not the other.

    Transferring to your name was probably just for ease of insuring. Why else would you transfer a car into someone else's name?

    Anyway give it back or be a scabby so and so, whatever you choose :-) your action would depend largely on why you broke up but i definitely think your being tight or pulling a fast one if you keep the car


  • Options
    #38
    Caliden
    Registered Users Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭Caliden


    It's been said already but if she wants the car back she has to fork out for the repairs you made.

    If not then tell her that any further communication must be made by her solicitor.


  • Options
    #39
    pavelpro
    Registered Users Posts: 176 ✭✭pavelpro


    <Unhelpful post removed>


  • Options
    #40
    iPhone.
    Registered Users Posts: 1,104 ✭✭✭iPhone.


    As said above , if she buys it back from you for a price that only reflects your outlay on it then if you are happy with that you could (not should) let her have it back'.

    Sounds like she didn't have much regard for the car in the first place so I think this sudden interest and urge to get it back is more personal than otherwise.

    Maybe offer it back to her on the above terms but tell her the back seat got knackered since you broke up with her Son. :p


  • Options
    #41
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    CJC999 wrote: »
    The VLC is used to transfer OWNERSHIP which makes the car the OP's. If there was some agreement or understanding with the OPs mother in law that she was just lending her the car then that should have been expressed at the time which it wasn't. The car was given to the OP because it wasn't being used. The OP spent a considerable amount of money to get the car roadworthy.

    She can ask all she wants but you can ignore it OP. She hasn't a leg to stand on, she can threaten to sue you but a solicitor would most likely advise her that she has no grounds to sue and even if she does sue all you have to do is wait until it gets a court date (in which time it will have cost her quite a bit in solicitors fees) and simply give her back the car and case can be deemed settled but it will never come to that. She's being a bitch and it's as simple as that.

    Not the case. A car with HP on it belongs to the finance house so I doubt that changing the details on the logbook transfers ownership absolutely.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Anan1
    Registered Users Posts: 22,818 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    CJC999 wrote: »
    If there was some agreement or understanding with the OPs mother in law that she was just lending her the car then that should have been expressed at the time which it wasn't.
    How do you know?


  • Options
    #43
    Zoney
    Registered Users Posts: 1,639 ✭✭✭Zoney


    Plenty of technicalities explained by others already. First decide if you personally are prepared to do either extreme of just keep it, or just hand it back.

    If you are, but would prefer middle ground (previous poster mentioned little room for this), then rather than ask to keep it or ask for money or anything, just simply say you think it's unfair when you spent 800 on repairs. Opportunity for ex's mother to offer something then. If no grace on her part then, go for one of your two extreme options depending on which you can handle.


  • Options
    #44
    Cienciano
    Registered Users Posts: 14,230 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    Tails142 wrote: »
    I would give the car back.

    You carried out some repairs, 800 isn't anything major to spend on a car and what you had done was probably just cosmetic or preventative.

    You were getting use of the car the whole time so it seems only right that you would maintain during this period.

    Guess what op, the car came with the boyfriend, you can't have one and not the other.

    Transferring to your name was probably just for ease of insuring. Why else would you transfer a car into someone else's name?

    Anyway give it back or be a scabby so and so, whatever you choose :-) your action would depend largely on why you broke up but i definitely think your being tight or pulling a fast one if you keep the car
    OP, ignore this entire post because it's rubbish.
    Was going to go through it and explain why, but pretty much every line in it is talking crap.

    Keep the car, ignore the mother. Simple.


  • Options
    #45
    Skatedude
    Registered Users Posts: 2,674 ✭✭✭Skatedude


    "The registered owner may not be the legal owner" It' a standard clause for all log books due to the fact that cars often have to be registered in the insurance policy holders name and not the owners name.
    She could easily make a legal case for ownership,especially if she still has the reciept and you dont, but it would have to go to court to sort it and dosent sound like it's really worth it for a car that's not worth much. Is it really worth the hassle?


  • Options
    #46
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Skatedude wrote: »
    "The registered owner may not be the legal owner" It' a standard clause for all log books due to the fact that cars often have to be registered in the insurance policy holders name and not the owners name.
    She could easily make a legal case for ownership,especially if she still has the reciept and you dont, but it would have to go to court to sort it and dosent sound like it's really worth it for a car that's not worth much. Is it really worth the hassle?

    With no other agreements in place, I would have thought that it would be up to the mother to prove that it was only a temporary arrangement. For all the court knows, the OP gave the mother €100 in cash for the car, and the mother is now just trying to pull a fast one.


  • Options
    #47
    ironclaw
    Registered Users Posts: 8,004 ✭✭✭ironclaw


    Just my two cents, but if she gave you the car 'for nothing' i.e. No money changed hands and you put €1000 into it. Thats basically the cost of the car if you were to have bought it off her. So you got a free car. Its a neutral asset as if you were to sell it, your going to get what you put into it (As its worth probably a shade under €1000) You'll lose a decent bit of money.

    If it was me, I wouldn't want the hassle. You got a free car for 6 months, hand it back (Perhaps asking for a 'token amount' for the hassle of getting the work done) and walk away. These things can have a habit of turning nasty and its bad karma anyway, in my opinion. There is nothing to gain by you keeping it as you'll still be at a loss. So its kinda whether you want the money (Asset or physical cash) in their pocket or yours. No luck will come of it, at least that would be my line.

    Bottom line? If the car was free and you spent €1000, if you sell it, your probably going to get anywhere between €800 and €1000. If you keep it, it ain't going to appreciate. So basically the hassle and stress is worth about €200. Not worth it in my opinion.


  • Options
    #48
    MrDerp
    Registered Users Posts: 990 ✭✭✭MrDerp


    1. Get a mannequin and dress it any of your bf's old clothes that are lying around your gaff.
    2. Park the car outside her house
    3. Sit the mannequin in the driver's seat with the head turned looking out the window
    4. Set fire to the lot.
    5. Stand across the road cackling like a maniac.


  • Options
    #49
    650Ginge
    Registered Users Posts: 900 ✭✭✭650Ginge


    challengemaster wrote: »
    You've no obligation to give it back, it's yours.

    What's morally correct is a whole different kettle of fish.[/

    Because you are the registered keeper doesn't make you the owner.

    Did you pay her for the car or have something signed to say she was giving it to you? I don't mean the registration anything else to prove a contract.


  • Options
    #50
    Moneymaker
    Registered Users Posts: 9,846 ✭✭✭Moneymaker


    It's your car, you don't have to give her anything.

    **** the spiteful cow.


  • Options
    #51
    twowheelsonly
    Registered Users Posts: 2,268 ✭✭✭twowheelsonly


    Tails142 wrote: »
    I would give the car back.

    You carried out some repairs, 800 isn't anything major to spend on a car and what you had done was probably just cosmetic or preventative.

    You were getting use of the car the whole time so it seems only right that you would maintain during this period.

    Guess what op, the car came with the boyfriend, you can't have one and not the other.

    Transferring to your name was probably just for ease of insuring. Why else would you transfer a car into someone else's name?

    Anyway give it back or be a scabby so and so, whatever you choose :-) your action would depend largely on why you broke up but i definitely think your being tight or pulling a fast one if you keep the car

    Whoops... I think the boyfriend just showed up :D


    IMO, you don't have to give it back but I would. I'd definitely mention the repairs bill though and I'd make an issue of telling her that it's ok to keep any presents that you ever gave her as you wouldn't like to be seen as the petty or vindictive one.
    Where does your ex stand in all of this? Is he backing his mother?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    zl1whqvjs75cdy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,042 ✭✭✭zl1whqvjs75cdy


    ironclaw wrote: »
    Just my two cents, but if she gave you the car 'for nothing' i.e. No money changed hands and you put €1000 into it. Thats basically the cost of the car if you were to have bought it off her. So you got a free car. Its a neutral asset as if you were to sell it, your going to get what you put into it (As its worth probably a shade under €1000) You'll lose a decent bit of money.

    If it was me, I wouldn't want the hassle. You got a free car for 6 months, hand it back (Perhaps asking for a 'token amount' for the hassle of getting the work done) and walk away. These things can have a habit of turning nasty and its bad karma anyway, in my opinion. There is nothing to gain by you keeping it as you'll still be at a loss. So its kinda whether you want the money (Asset or physical cash) in their pocket or yours. No luck will come of it, at least that would be my line.

    Bottom line? If the car was free and you spent €1000, if you sell it, your probably going to get anywhere between €800 and €1000. If you keep it, it ain't going to appreciate. So basically the hassle and stress is worth about €200. Not worth it in my opinion.

    How in the name of good jaysus will she be at a loss if she keeps it?


  • Options
    #53
    deandean
    Registered Users Posts: 2,224 ✭✭✭deandean


    The OP keeping the car reminds me of women who break it off, then keep the engagement ring. There's something very mean about it.


  • Options
    #54
    mathepac
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,991 ✭✭✭mathepac


    EmilieStiletto wrote: »
    Yes I have the certificate with all the info that says I'm the owner.
    That only proves you are the 'registered owner', it does not prove you have beneficial ownership of the car.


  • Options
    #55
    mathepac
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,991 ✭✭✭mathepac


    EmilieStiletto wrote: »
    She did give it to me and I have the certificate of ownership of the car.
    You have the certificate of registered ownership. To establish transfer of beneficial ownership you need a bill of sale, invoice, etc


  • Options
    #56
    ironclaw
    Registered Users Posts: 8,004 ✭✭✭ironclaw


    donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »
    How in the name of good jaysus will she be at a loss if she keeps it?

    Well, depends on the definition of loss.

    By keeping it, she has a €1000 investment that upon sale will net her probably €800. So she will have lost €200 on the 'investment' (Assuming the car was given to her and no money paid)

    Thats as opposed to handing the car back and losing the full €1000 of an investment.

    Either way, your talking about a range of about €1000 to €200 of a loss which to me, personally, wouldn't be worth fighting / debating about in what is already probably a bad situation. Car won't do you any favours in the long run and you'd literally be sinking money into it by any addition work / service. Even putting €1000 into a 1999 Ka was a bad move in the first place.

    So its just costing money no matter what way you look at it. Cut your losses at (most) €1000 and walk away. Thats just my view on it. Really, its down to how someone views the financial aspect of the whole thing. And when money and emotions get mixed, its a bad recipe.


  • Options
    #57
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    deandean wrote: »
    The OP keeping the car reminds me of women who break it off, then keep the engagement ring. There's something very mean about it.

    You dont generally spend in excess of €500 keeping an engagement ring on the road though...


  • Options
    #58
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    ironclaw wrote: »
    Well, depends on the definition of loss.

    By keeping it, she has a €1000 investment that upon sale will net her probably €800. So she will have lost €200 on the 'investment' (Assuming the car was given to her and no money paid)

    Thats as opposed to handing the car back and losing the full €1000 of an investment.

    Either way, your talking about a range of about €1000 to €200 of a loss which to me, personally, wouldn't be worth fighting / debating about in what is already probably a bad situation. Car won't do you any favours in the long run and you'd literally be sinking money into it by any addition work / service. Even putting €1000 into a 1999 Ka was a bad move in the first place.

    So its just costing money no matter what way you look at it. Cut your losses at (most) €1000 and walk away. Thats just my view on it.

    €1000 is a lot of money to walk away from; a lot more than most people would be prepared to do.

    Now, if the mother was prepared to pay the OP the money back that they put into the car then that would be a different thing, but if its just a case handing back the keys then I can completely understand why the OP would object. This doesnt sound like a loan; the OP was given the car and spent time and money doing it up, something they probably would not have done had they been given the car on the understanding that they would have to give it back at some point.


  • Options
    #59
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    yep that's not the same at all (just very unjust)

    I have a feeling that the €1000 she put into it incudes the NCT, tax and Insurance, all of which she had the benefit of, so the only cost she really paid was the repairs to get it on the road, which also benefited her, so her loss would be very small if she gave it back.


  • Options
    #60
    mathepac
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,991 ✭✭✭mathepac


    djimi wrote: »
    With no other agreements in place, I would have thought that it would be up to the mother to prove that it was only a temporary arrangement. ...
    No, it doesn't work that way.

    As the beneficial owner of the car (as defined by OP when she posted that ex's Mammy paid for the car from a dealer) all Mammy needs to prove ownership of the car is her receipt / cheque-stub / bank-statement. If it were to go to court Mr. Car Dealer and Mammy's financial documents would make for compelling evidence of ownership. The 'log book' is inadmissible as they are all endorsed as stated in a previous post "this document is not proof of ownership". Simplez - Mammy wins


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 21,179 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Sounds like one for Judge Judy ! :D


Advertisement