Talk

Advanced search

Should I have sold my husbands bling?

(59 Posts)
Bogeyface Wed 29-Jun-11 10:54:03

THIS IS NOT ME BTW!!!! I just read this on the Martin Lewis Moneysaver email/website and wondered what your opinions where.

Money Moral Dilemma: Should I have flogged my husband's bling?

I was clearing out the loft and found a chunky gold necklace of my husband's, which, to be honest, I always thought was hideous. It had been up there 10 years and he'd totally forgotten about it, but I was worried he'd start wearing it again if he saw it. So I flogged it to (MSE's top) gold buying site for £200 and put the money in our joint account - handy as we're a bit strapped for cash at the moment. But now I feel a tad guilty; was I wrong to melt his bling without telling him?

MaxSchreck Wed 29-Jun-11 10:55:39

Yes, she was wrong because it wasn't hers.

tinsofmince Wed 29-Jun-11 10:56:12

Brilliant. I sold my DHs motorbike without telling him. He was a tiny bit pissed off when he found out.
As far as the woman with the bling problem. She was doing the world a favour IMO. What are the chances he will start wearing a chunky gold necklace?

RealityIsRoughlyTheSizeOfABoat Wed 29-Jun-11 10:56:30

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CogitoErgoSometimes Wed 29-Jun-11 10:56:50

LOL!.... Whoever it was probably shouldn't have done it but, if he hadn't noticed the thing for over 10 years, the 'all my worldly goods I thee endow' defence applies. At least she put the cash in the joint account. I found a few forgotten valuables of my exH's after he left and they were quietly e-Bayed.... didn't give him any of it smile

BooyHoo Wed 29-Jun-11 10:58:27

probably not the right thing but i wouldn't batt an eyelid at this. they needed the money and he hadn't seen it for 10 years. it's a result in my book.

mayorquimby Wed 29-Jun-11 10:59:16

Yup, I sold my gf's "beloved" first editions so we could get sky. She hardly ever read them at all and she could get exactly the same story in a later press at a second hand bookstore.
She was very pissed off though.

Bogeyface Wed 29-Jun-11 11:00:22

I posted on there that I thought it was fine, he had forgotten he had it, she didnt like it and they were skint, so win win imo. But according to the Moneysavers, its THEFT!!! They are more judgey and morally indignant than MNers, who knew?! grin

redskyatnight Wed 29-Jun-11 11:06:15

I have jewellery that I have put away because I don't like it but have kept for sentimental reasons (a chain from my grandmothers; bracelet given to me by a friend's parents when she passed away). I would be horrified if my DH sold it without asking me. Out of sight does not mean out of mind.

TheBigJessie Wed 29-Jun-11 11:08:58

Why couldn't she ask him about it, first to completely eliminate any moral dilemma?

Yours, confused in Milton Keynes.

TandB Wed 29-Jun-11 11:20:55

Mayorquimby - I would have flayed you alive and probably put your head through the Sky TV screen.

My late grandmother cleared out her housejust before they moved, having asked me to create a pile of boxes of stuff that needed to be kept. She was very insistent that it needed to go in a particular place and that she would NOT under any circumstances get muddled. I was dubious so I wrote "To stay" in big letters on the top box on the pile. So she kept the top box and took the rest of the pile to the charity shop.

Among other things, one of the boxes contained a full set of Rupert the Bear annuals going back to the 1940s that had been given to me as gifts over my entire life. Apart from the sentimental value they were probably worth at least £2,000.

We did speak again eventually but she never threw out another book as long as she lived!

KatyMac Wed 29-Jun-11 11:23:07

Jewellery is one thing (acceptable)

first editions is another (completely unacceptable)

IMO

mayorquimby Wed 29-Jun-11 11:25:38

"Mayorquimby - I would have flayed you alive and probably put your head through the Sky TV screen."

grin . TBH I never did that and would never dream of doing such a thing because it is an incredibly mean and selfish thing to do. I was however interested to see if there'd be a difference in the reaction to this woman selling something of her husbands that he seldom used,that she didn't like or value and that was never likely to get universal approval from a mn audience (I don't think they're big on gold chains on men) and me fictionally selling something of my gf's which I didn't value or particularly like and which she seldom used.

Ormirian Wed 29-Jun-11 11:26:02

Hideous jewellery - no problem
First editions - you'd be dead!

And yes I see the inconsistency.

mayorquimby Wed 29-Jun-11 11:27:28

hit post too soon

and which was more likely to appeal to the mn audience.
i.e. treasured first editions.
fwiw i think the woman was completely in the wrong. She didn't ask because she didn't want the answer to be "no, i want to keep hold of my posessions."
it was an incredibly selfish and mean spirited thing to do on her part.

fatlazymummy Wed 29-Jun-11 11:30:03

Of course it's stealing. The only way I would do this is if it was the only means of feeding my children but as she put the money in the bank account then that obviously didn't apply.
I really can't believe that some people think it is alright to sell someone else's property without asking them 1st.

mayorquimby Wed 29-Jun-11 11:35:00

"Hideous jewellery - no problem
First editions - you'd be dead!

And yes I see the inconsistency."

And this is the point isn't it.
It just proves the ultimately selfish actions of the woman in the original scenario.
Something which I subjectively value - absolutely not, you'd be dead
Something which I subjectively view to be ugly/unnecessary/worthless - absolutely fine

I think anyone who would apply such an attitude to their partners posessions is incredibly selfish and could have no complaints if the roles were reversed.
i.e. if this man went and took a set of pearl/diamond earings that the wife wore say once a year or at weddings and decided that he was the final arbitrator of whether he was entitled to sell them using his own subjective pro's vs cons list of how many times she wears them, how much he could sell them for and ultimately whether he liked and valued them aesthetically as a piece of jewellry.
I'd no more sell my gf's first editions off my own back than she'd sell my vinyl becuase thankfully neither of us are that selfish. Despite the fact that some of the books and records involved have gone untouched for years and I have most definitely forgotten that I own certain albums.

CogitoErgoSometimes Wed 29-Jun-11 11:35:41

Bloody hell. Is it Saint Week on MN? Has no-one ever 'accidentally' broken or lost something that their partner likes but they don't? Never put that rammy old t-shirt in the charity bag and claimed the dog chewed it? A nasty necklace shoved in the loft for 10 years was hardly a treasured keepsake. He probably won't notice it's missing for another 10.

Nowtspecial Wed 29-Jun-11 11:37:55

I don't think it's acceptable to sell your OHs stuff without their permission even if it's been hidden away for years. First editions, Oh. My.

KatyMac Wed 29-Jun-11 11:39:08

No because if they were you first editions I would have said the same

Jewellery (new jewellery particularly) is one thing, but BOOKS!!!!

mayorquimby Wed 29-Jun-11 11:39:33

I know I haven't anyway. Why would I? There's plenty of clothes my gf wears that i dislike, we have fairly different styles. Doesn't give me the right to throw them out or destroy them. If she wants to hang on to items for sentimental value or becuase she thinks she may wear them again even if she never will then I think it'd be ridiculous of me to get rid of them.
Plenty of stuff in my attic that I haven't seen in 10 years that I wouldn't want thrown out, if I wanted it thrown out it wouldn't be in the attic would it?

supadupapupascupa Wed 29-Jun-11 11:42:16

if my dh sold my belongings there would be hell to pay! he has no right to!!!!

however if he suggested i sell them i would probably agree.

but imo it is theft and very disrespectful

mayorquimby Wed 29-Jun-11 11:45:02

"No because if they were you first editions I would have said the same

Jewellery (new jewellery particularly) is one thing, but BOOKS!!!!"

But that's exactly my point. We've both decided that books are more valuable to us subjectively so they can't be touched. However jewellry is fair game because we don't value it as highly.
Others may well view jewellry as holding greater subjective value than books, particularly in differentiating between first editions and standard reprints.

TrilllianAstra Wed 29-Jun-11 11:45:07

I would have suggested "let's clear out the loft and sell off anything that's worth anything and we don't use any more"

The only risks there are:
1 - he finds it and decides to wear it again
2 - you find something that you haven't used in 10 years but you decide you want it

TheBigJessie Wed 29-Jun-11 11:47:54

CogitoErgoSometimes: Has no-one ever 'accidentally' broken or lost something that their partner likes but they don't? Never put that rammy old t-shirt in the charity bag and claimed the dog chewed it?

Well, of course I haven't! Why would anyone?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now