Man Sues Ex-Fiancée for $125,000 Ring

[Rockinruby]

Are there any circumstances in which you would feel justified in keeping an engagement ring? Would you give it back?

Etiquette from The New Rules of Engagement Ring Etiquette
If something sours and you decide to break off the engagement, you should at least offer to return the ring, particularly if it was gift. If you helped pick out the ring or even helped pay for it, ideally you'll return the ring and split the financial gains.


Man Sues Ex-Fiancée for $125,000 Ring
https://www.yahoo.com/style/man-sues-ex-fiancee-for-125000-ring-214353266.html
most accounts, Amy Bzura and Bradley Moss were looking forward to a happy marriage and long life together. The two were set to marry this past October with friends and family excited to attend the affair. But the two have ended up in a different type of legal arrangement, as Moss is suing Bzura for the return of the $125,000 engagement ring he gave her.

As reported in the New York Post, the New York City-based couple had been dating for more than three years when Moss proposed to Bzura on Nov. 7, 2015, according to court documents. That’s when he gave her the square emerald-cut diamond engagement ring, apparently valued at $125,000. They were set to be married on October 29.

Court documents do not detail why the wedding was cancelled and the engagement was broken, but Moss demanded the return of the ring in early November. According to the Post, “the suit calls for the return of the ring, or its value in cash, with interest, along with punitive damages determined by the court.”

FindLaw, an online legal resource, points out that relevant gift-giving laws are determined state by state, and most states have adopted a no-fault approach to determining if a betrothed must return an engagement ring. Which means the courts in these states don’t like to get caught up in the whys and wherefores: “They view the relationship as private and therefore none of their business. If the engagement is broken, the giver gets the ring back, regardless of who or why.” That could be bad news for Amy Bzura, as New York is one of these states.

 

[ruby59]

I would also add:

If he breaks it off and you have put down non refundable deposits that he refuses to help you with then I see no reason why you cannot sell the ring to pay them off.

 

[telephone89]

My opinion - if you aren't married yet, no matter what happens, he (or the giver) gets the ring back. The ring is a gift, but a contractual gift. I give you this ring and then we get married.

Once you're married its more difficult. I fully believe if there is cheating, the other person should keep it lol. But really, whatever the state/provincial laws say is what goes.

 

[VRBeauty]

My opinion - if you aren't married yet, no matter what happens, he (or the giver) gets the ring back. The ring is a gift, but a contractual gift. I give you this ring and then we get married.

Once you're married its more difficult. I fully believe if there is cheating, the other person should keep it lol. But really, whatever the state/provincial laws say is what goes.

But what if HE broke off the engagement, or his actions (an affair with someone else, for example) caused her to break off the engagement - AND - she had already paid quite a bit for wedding planning? If this couple got engaged in Nov. 2015 and were planning a wedding of any size to take place a mere 11 months later, the wedding planning very likely started pretty much right away. That contract stuff works both ways, at least philosophically. If the woman or her family have paid for a dress and wedding-related deposits, those expenses were also paid with the expectation that a wedding would take place.

I agree that in general an engagement ring is a contingent gift, and (to me) generally the moral thing would be to return it if the engagement is broken off... but there are always exceptions.

 

[telephone89]

But what if HE broke off the engagement, or his actions (an affair with someone else, for example) caused her to break off the engagement - AND - she had already paid quite a bit for wedding planning? If this couple got engaged in Nov. 2015 and were planning a wedding of any size to take place a mere 11 months later, the wedding planning very likely started pretty much right away. That contract stuff works both ways, at least philosophically. If the woman or her family have paid for a dress and wedding-related deposits, those expenses were also paid with the expectation that a wedding would take place.

I agree that in general an engagement ring is a contingent gift, and (to me) generally the moral thing would be to return it if the engagement is broken off... but there are always exceptions.

That is an interesting point. Depending on how far out the wedding is cancelled, a lot of the deposits would be non refundable or even due in full. Yet another reason why I'm all in favour of planning a wedding you can afford rather than going into debt for one!

You also have to look at what's reasonable and fair. If she purchased a $100k wedding dress, and had $25k in other deposits down, does that give her the right to keep the ring to cover those debts? I would say no. A $100k wedding dress is NOT a reasonable expense. The other $25k could be.

In a situation where there are deposits paid, I think the fairest thing would be to note who paid for what and try to evenly split it. I don't think the male (cheating or not) is responsible for paying for the entire wedding/deposits (which it would be if you were to sell the ring to cover her deposits), so I think splitting it would be the easiest way.

 

[Bron357]

When I was young I had a broken engagement. My mother told me the "correct thing to do" was return the engagement ring and contact the gift givers from the engagement party to offer to return their gifts. All losses on deposits were shared equally. I kept all the other gifts given to me by my ex fiancée and his family and vice versa.