To think that once your given something it’s yours?

[Wonderland18]

So my friend was engaged but recently broke up with her fiancé, he has asked for his ring back and she’s a bit upset as it represents a good chunk of her life.

I’m pretty much of the opinion of unless it was handed down from his family and if it was specifically bought for her it’s hers but was wondering if that’s unreasonable?

Should she have to give back something if it was given as a proposal to a marriage that didn’t happen?

Moot point cause she’s agreed to give it back but I’m still curious what others views are on it. Should an engagement ring be treated differently to other gifts of affection?

If they split up reasonably amicably with no others involved then I think he's an arse for asking for the ring back. He's going to get a nasty shock if he thinks he can sell it for any more than about 10-20% of what he paid for it.

Judge Judy says it's part of a contract to marry and if you break that contract you should return the ring. Not sure if it would be the same over here but I think it should be returned. She looks very grabby by keeping it, after all it wasn't a gift as such.

I gave mine back.. why would I want a reminder to sit in a box, wouldn’t want to wear it either.
Twas even better when he proposed to the OW with it missing a stone with a deep scratch on the band definitely mine.. tightest of lying arseholes probably said it was a family heirloom.

@PsychosonicCindy

Lol.. That is exactly what I would have referred to for my legal stance on this

She has me in stitches.

Under English law engagement rings belongs to the recipient unless there was an explicit agreement that it would be returned in event of the wedding not going ahead.

She gives it back if she instigated the break up.
She keeps it if he reneged on his contract to marry.

I think it’s strange to want to keep the ring if she’s binned him off

it's what's done in England is NOT the case thecalmorchid

In UK law the giving of an engagement ring is presumed to be an absolute gift and there is no obligation on the part of recipient to return it if the engagement is broken.

However, this could be rebutted if the ring was given on condition that the marriage takes place and, regardless of whether the ring was a family heirloom or not, it would be morally correct to return it if the recipient was the one who broke off the engagement.

Judge Judy is an American lawyer who dispenses justice according to US law and in this instance US law differs greatly from that of the UK in that an engagement ring is always returned no matter who ends the engagement.

@hoxtonbabe

Only Judy can judge me!!

Legally he’s not entitled to the ring back. He’s given it as a gift. There’s no contract. Morally it’s up to her I suppose to do whatever she feels is the right thing.

I agree with the posters saying if SHE ended it she should give it back to him, if HE ended it, then she should keep it/sell it.

If she broke off the engagement then she should offer the ring back, though I'm a bit bemused by why either of them would want it - she won't wear it again and he's not going to want to give it to somebody else now, surely?

When me and my former fiance decided to go our separate ways (mutual and amicable decision) I asked if he wanted the ring back. He said no, I had the stones re-set into a band which I wore on my right hand.
The ring disappeared about 15 years ago (I have my suspicions as to where and how) but if I still had it, I would still wear it, despite approaching 16 years of marriage to someone else.

Can't think what pleasure she could ever get from wearing it, whatever the circumstances of the breakup. Definitely should be returned .

Give it back - unless he cheated, in which case flog it, get the first flight to Fuengirola, get pissed on cheap Sangria, shag lots of Spanish waiters and send him a postcard saying ‘Glad you’re not here’.

Get real, she's not upset because it "represents a good chunk of her life", she's upset because she wants to sell it. Of course it should be given back

Yes, has happened a couple of times with PILs. They are wealthy and often change their furnishings. We have never been asked if we would like any of the stuff they get rid of (Stressless leather recliners etc), we find out later that they gave things to their cleaner, or paid someone to take them to the tip. They have at times though asked us if they could have stuff of ours - exercise bike, coatstand etc, things we use every day! However once they gave us a couple of old Persian type rugs, which were lovely. One went in the bedroom and I based the colour scheme around it, and the other in the sitting room, ditto. 6 months later they asked DH if they could have them back. I said no .... which he had to pass on to them. Apparently it did not go down well.

Get real, she's not upset because it "represents a good chunk of her life", she's upset because she wants to sell it. Of course it should be given back

^This

I think he should get it back. He may have outstanding finance on it and wants to sell it to clear off the debt. That's what happened to my friend. She proposed to her girlfriend, she accepted and 3 months later she ended it. She still had a fair whack to pay off on the ring so selling it helped her pay towards that.

Also, when she meets somebody else, why would she want an engagement ring from somebody else sitting in her drawers?

Her memories should be good enough to account for this chunk in her life.

If the receiver was the one to break off the engagement they should return the ring. Legally they may or may not have to but morally it's the right thing to do.

If the giver was to break off the engagement then the receiver would rightly feel entitled to keep the ring. In fact, that's really what engagement ring were originally, an item of value which could be 'cashed in' if the marriage didn't take place. If the woman/her family lost out financially or the woman was less marriageable as a result then at least there was some compensation. Of course, we don't (generally!) treat women as chattels any more whose financial value can be affected, nor is a woman deemed to be tarnished morally for a broken engagement, but the tradition still seems to stand.