Return the ring?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You guys mean to tell me that if some guy ran out on you with no means to care for your four kids and you had something really valuable to sell, you'd choose to raise your kids in poverty?

This site is overrun with sanctimonious liars.

If the family with all the resources sues her into oblivion behind selling this ring that ain't hers, how does that help the kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The real question is how much is the ring worth and do you have it in writing that she should give it back. Did she sign a pre-nup?

I haven't read all the replies but I cannot believe it took six pages for someone to ask this question.

[Anonymous]

Why can't people stay on topic?

We have idiots guessing the wife posted this. Do you think the wife would confess to her cheating?

Then we have idiots saying OP is the husband. As if he would call himself a deadbeat.

Now OP is the niece, the aunt, the dog. Cripes. You guys really suck at sleuthing.

[Anonymous]

It is so obvious people here have no contact with money.

People whose money and possessions are bound up in family trusts don't need prenups. Alimony and child support come out of what the spouse owns personally. You have no claim on any family wealth. If his personal income and assets are minimal, then you and the kids get a pittance while he keeps living in the lap of luxury off his family's wealth. I have seen this happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is how much is the ring worth and do you have it in writing that she should give it back. Did she sign a pre-nup?

I haven't read all the replies but I cannot believe it took six pages for someone to ask this question.

They didn't need a prenup, it's in the trust.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is how much is the ring worth and do you have it in writing that she should give it back. Did she sign a pre-nup?

I haven't read all the replies but I cannot believe it took six pages for someone to ask this question.

They didn't need a prenup, it's in the trust.

Is the wife a signatory to the trust? Probably not. She is currently in possession of an item that the trust owns. Did she ever agree to that in writing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP. Here's a twist: What if the trust won't sue DW because DH's family wants to avoid messiness and doesn't want to risk access to the kids. Should DW still return the ring?

DW should return the ring. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is how much is the ring worth and do you have it in writing that she should give it back. Did she sign a pre-nup?

I haven't read all the replies but I cannot believe it took six pages for someone to ask this question.

They didn't need a prenup, it's in the trust.

Is the wife a signatory to the trust? Probably not. She is currently in possession of an item that the trust owns. Did she ever agree to that in writing?

Why do you keep asking that? It doesn't matter. It's like the PP said upthread. If you rent an apartment, you can sublet it, but you can't sell it. Everything in this situation turns on the fact that the husband didn't own the ring. A prenup controls owned property. The ring isn't in there. Wife had use of the ring for the life of the husband. She doesn't have to give it back now legally, unless the trust specifies that it be returned upon divorce. But she does eventually. It's not hers, never was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is how much is the ring worth and do you have it in writing that she should give it back. Did she sign a pre-nup?

I haven't read all the replies but I cannot believe it took six pages for someone to ask this question.

They didn't need a prenup, it's in the trust.

Is the wife a signatory to the trust? Probably not. She is currently in possession of an item that the trust owns. Did she ever agree to that in writing?

She doesn't need to sign anything. If she keeps something the trust owns, it's theft. She doesn't own. Her husband gave it to her, but he didn't own it either.

[Anonymous]

Still talking in hypotheticals, this is dumb. Post the real story so we can give a real opinion.

[Anonymous]

Did the wife sign anything about the ring?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any lawyers who can answer? How is a stipulation like that even enforceable? Once he gives it to his wife how is she bound to it.

The answer is a simple first year property issue. A person can't give away what they don't own.

DH has the right to use the ring. He doesn't have ownership of the ring. He can only give her the right to use the ring. He can't give DW ownership of the ring, because he doesn't have ownership of the ring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think OP is the anti-Kate Middleton poster. She read gossip that Wills and Kate are divorcing and thinks that she will marry Prince Harry. And she wants that sapphire ring!

Because Wills is abusive and they have a kid with CP, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here, with a question about the trust -- if the ring loan is only for DH's lifetime, does that mean if he died while they were still married, the wife has to give back the ring then? Even without a divorce?

Interesting concept, this loaning of family heirlooms.
- signed, none in my family

Yes, that's what "for the life of the beneficiary" means. It would suck for her, but again it was never her ring to begin with. Next in line would get it.

This is the point that all of the "she has to give it back immediately" posters are missing, I think. If OP is correct, the husband has the right to possess the ring during his lifetime. He is still alive. He chose to give the ring as an engagement ring, subject to the conditions of the trust. That means (I think) that the normal rules of engagement rings apply, subject to the overriding trust conditions. She is not obligated to give it back to him simply because they divorce, but she is obligated to give it back to the trust upon his death. Who cheated on whom doesn't matter. Also, she can't sell it. But if he wants it back immediately, she certainly can use it as a bargaining chip. Whether she should or not is an entirely different question.

All of that said, I am not a T&E lawyer, so this could all be completely wrong. Also, it's likely that OP hasn't provided a complete description of the trust provisions, and there could be something in there that addresses this situation.