Can husband have wife arrested for using family car without husband's permission?

Isn't there a difference between a presumed joint asset for divorce purposes and the current legal owner of the vehicle?

If husband bought and paid for the car and his name is on the invoice/receipt then it is his property unless a court orders it otherwise. He may have given tacit permission for it to be used as a "family car" but that does not transfer ownership and if he revokes that permission then Nick_C and Comms69 are right - he could (if he wants to be awkward) report it as stolen and the daughter could be committing the offence of Taking Without Owner's Consent.

itsanne has only bolded part of a sentence and maybe misinterpreted the meaning - that advice is actually saying that they would not pursue one partner for unknowingly allowing the other to drive uninsured. In this case - his refusal to renew would indicate that he did know she was uninsured on that car and his only defence would be to declare that it was TWOC'ed. Mind you - he should also have declared the car SORN - better check he didn't think of that or that's potentially another offence if she drives it.

NBLondon wrote: »

Isn't there a difference between a presumed joint asset for divorce purposes and the current legal owner of the vehicle?

If husband bought and paid for the car and his name is on the invoice/receipt then it is his property unless a court orders it otherwise. He may have given tacit permission for it to be used as a "family car" but that does not transfer ownership and if he revokes that permission then Nick_C and Comms69 are right - he could (if he wants to be awkward) report it as stolen and the daughter could be committing the offence of Taking Without Owner's Consent.

itsanne has only bolded part of a sentence and maybe misinterpreted the meaning - that advice is actually saying that they would not pursue one partner for unknowingly allowing the other to drive uninsured. In this case - his refusal to renew would indicate that he did know she was uninsured on that car and his only defence would be to declare that it was TWOC'ed. Mind you - he should also have declared the car SORN - better check he didn't think of that or that's potentially another offence if she drives it.

In my opinion, in the police advice above, not pursuing one partner is simply an example of the effect of joint ownership. I bolded part of the sentence simply because it summarised the answer to the OP's question. If a car is jointly owned, a couple's separation doesn't mean that it can be unilaterally claimed by one any more than any other joint asset such as a house.

MySonEd wrote: »

Correct.

BTW: My daughter stopped driving the car immediately after his demand.

Looks like husband will receive a letter from DVLA soon, first about a warning for no insurance and then a fine (providing it is taxed).

Even if people here tell you it's a jointly owned car, will she be able to drive it feeling 100% confident? I do tend to worry about things but if I knew it was a possibility that the car I was driving would be reported as stolen and I could be pulled over, I'd stop driving it until the separation was sorted. If her ex told the Police the full story, they may well refuse to get involved but how easy would it be for him to just say it's been stolen? They might stop her and then let her go on her way once she explains but is it worth the stress? It sounds like she has enough to worry about at the moment. If I could help my daughter avoid that, I would.