Whose contract?

unholyangel

I don't think theres enough info atm to say one way or another.

For example you say B couldnt buy the car themselves, why not? If it was because they were working offshore/out of the country then that would be fine (imo). But if for example B got A to buy it because they had debts and were claiming A owned the car, not B (so creditors couldnt take it) then theres a good chance that will at least muddy the waters.

Also, I don't think V5 in B's name is proof C knew A was acting as an agent. V5 is registered keeper and has sweet nanty to do with ownership.

Are A & B still on good terms? As a safety net, it might be possible to get them to write a letter stating they give B the right to take action on their behalf. That way if the court decides the contract is with A, hopefully the hearing can still proceed with B acting as an agent for A.

If you have legal cover on your home/car insurance....give them a call and see what they say.

Ultimately if 2 barristers are disagreeing, a judge will likely be required to settle the dispute. Just a shame you hadn't paid by credit card as I believe section 75 only requires that the main cardholder get use/benefit of the purchase - which the v5 would prove.

monhon1

No they are not on good terms although A has provided a witness statement and did attend the 1st hearing but that was postponed and has has had no contact since. B was with the 2 toddlers at the time looking after them but within the vicinity of the 'garage'; the foyer. No debts. The Seller wrote the V5 in B's name but invoice in A's. Payment on B's card and cash.

gettingtheresometime

I was also going to say that A was acting as an agent of B.