Should I have sold my husbands bling?

[Bogeyface]

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?

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

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?

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 :)

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.

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.

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?! :o

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.

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

Yours, confused in Milton Keynes.

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!

Jewellery is one thing (acceptable)

first editions is another (completely unacceptable)

IMO

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

. 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.

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

And yes I see the inconsistency.

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.

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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

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

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?

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

"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.

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

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?

MQ - don't get me wrong, I don't think she should have sold his chain either. But the first edition thing hit a still very, very raw nerve!

I think family can be a bit blasé with each other's possessions.

I was the executor of my grandmother's estate, such as it was, and she also left me all her personal possessions as I had lived with her from the age of 12. There weren't many things that I wanted to keep but there were a couple of ornaments and some memorabilia that I had wanted. Unfortunately, the rest of the family decided that none of these things were terribly important so it wouldn't matter if they just took them as well as the specific things my gran had left them. I kept realising things were missing weeks later and sending emails asking if my cousins had seen them, only to get replies saying "Oh I thought I would take that since she said I could have the other one" or "It was in a cupboard so I didn't think anyone wanted it".

I finished up doing all the work to get rid of the unwanted things and was left without anything that actually had any real meaning attached to it.