<p>You should say something to your friend. That’s just terrible. $10k is a lot of money and I’m sure your friend will pawn it or something. That’s just terrible. Poor guy. I wonder if this matter can be taken to court.</p>
<p>It seems greedy of her to keep the ring. Why else would she want a reminder of a marriage that – due to her own choice – didn’t happen?</p>
<p>The guy is out $10 k, but that’s a bargain considering he could have been stuck for a long time with a woman who seems to have quite a sense of entitlement and greed.</p>
<p>She should give the ring back. It’s a conditional gift, and her right to keep it is conditioned on going through with the marriage. Heck, no self-respecting lawyer would propose to a woman on Christmas or her birthday lest it be deemed to not be a conditional gift. (just joshing!) Putting legalities aside, returning the ring is simply the right thing to do in this circumstance.</p>
<p>He does deserve the ring back but unfortunately may not get it. Without a written contract, she can keep it and doesn’t have to give it back to him, technically speaking. As silly as it sounds there should be a contract upon giving certain items to people (car, diamond ring, house) stating that they acknowledge that if something goes wrong, then they agree to return the item.
Without having a legally signed document, the ring is her property because she is the possessor and he doesn’t have anything legal to uphold his claim.</p>
<p>She definitely should give it back but the hard truth is without a legal “something,” she doesn’t have to.</p>
<p>I’m not familiar with this though but if I was him I’d do everything in my power to get it back. I got it! The receipt. If the receipt has his name on it, its his, provided that no other legal document is in existence.</p>
<p>Philosophically: technically, you can go and beat up somebody/hurt them for no reason, but you don’t because it is wrong and amoral. so too, you don’t keep something expensive after you keep a promise and then break it for the purpose of keeping a very expensive item, that is wrong and amoral.</p>
<p>Just out of curiosity, is there anyone here who could think of an argument for the woman NOT returning the ring to the man?</p>
<p>Gender-studies majors, feel free to comment ;)</p>
<p>@27
First, let me remove your word “Woman.” As reflected in my earlier post, I like things sex-and-gender neutral, so I’ll say “recipient.”</p>
<p>I don’t agree with the “conditional gift” argument. I just quoted Wikipedia, pointing out that there is in fact legal precedent. Had I ruled the world, it is simply a matter of giving a gift. That the culture loads the scenario with a particular expectation is silly - we cannot assume that both participants in the gift-giving process acknowledge the same culture in exact form. The law does not tell people what creed to live by, and the failure of the expectation is the donor’s loss. Not that I would like to acknowledge cultural awareness in court, it is rather rare for the donor in such a situation to make specific stipulations upon presentation of the gift. Perhaps the OP could inform us of specifics, but the OP may not be privy to that information. Of course, refusal to return the object may sour the relationship between the recipient and donor, but then why does the blame fall on the recipient for the soured relationship? The donor could just back off.</p>
<p>Suppose I hand you a book, and simultaneously ask you to join me on a voyage. (Recall that burden of work or justification in any proposal is regarded as on the side of the proposer, and it may usually be assumed the one who is asking is the one who stands to benefit more clearly, so the proposer must find some means to entice the proposee; in the marital case at hand, let us presume ceteris paribus the OP’s friend would have proposed if it were more clearly in her interest as opposed to being in the interest of the prospective spouse.) I think this situation is similar. The main difference at hand is the value of the book as opposed to the value of the actual gift used in the OP’s account. Assume that I did not give you a contract or discuss it previously; I just handed you a book. What do you make of that? Is the book in your custody, of my free will, via an act that has been sealed in history?</p>
<p>It reminds me of some readings in anthropology; the native Americans had their own rituals of supposedly to-be-returned gifts, as did the coastal Polynesians and their circles of friends and conch shells with expectations of sharing along so that shells would move far, in friendship, as they traded gifts over long distances. The native north North American tribes (Canada) gave gifts to shame and impress expecting gifts in return as their improvised warfare, but, quite rudely, tradition is not law.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, there is legal precedent. Let them take it to court if they think their arguments stand.</p>
<p>Is this satisfactory?</p>
<p>Why should she give it back?
Think about what you guys are saying; if an engagement ring is a conditional gift you’re essentially paying someone to marry you. Now I don’t have a problem with that, and in fact that’s way more realistic than calling an engagement ring some kind of symbol of love and devotion. Props to the woman for being a straight shooter.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Haha are you serious? That’s like going to Hertz’s prestige collection, renting an Escalade, and then keeping it without paying for it. It is stealing, and it is morally reprehensible.</p>
<p>give it back. If she wants to keep it, then reimburse the former fiance the 10K.</p>
<p>Can’t you relate this to ED at a college? The college wants you and entices you with a greater percentage of getting in. You decide that you don’t want to go, essentially causing the college to lose an admissions spot for a potential applicant that would have attended. The only difference would be that you actually sign a binding contract with the college. The college would probably blacklist your school and contact your other potential colleges.</p>
<p>I don’t agree that you’re basically paying someone to marry you. What about the poor man? He doesn’t get anything shiny, just a coy wink and word contract of engagement. The engagement ring has essentially be a symbol of promise and love since the classical times (wikipedia). It’s only called a conditional gift because there has to be legal precedents in the event cases like these began popping up (breaking promises and etc).</p>
<p>yes she should</p>
<p>It is considered something of a contract, thus if she breaks the contract, she must return the ring.</p>
<p>[Ask</a> Aden: Should she return the engagement ring?](<a href=“http://www.askaden.com/2009/12/should-she-return-engagement-ring.html]Ask”>http://www.askaden.com/2009/12/should-she-return-engagement-ring.html)</p>
<p>Dear Aden, <a href="mailto:ask@askaden.com">ask@askaden.com</a></p>
<p>Should I return the engagement ring I was given? My fianc</p>
<p>Gold Digger… Grrrrrrr</p>
<p>Any court would rule that the ring be returned. It was a gift…with a contract of sorts. The engagement ring was given on the condition and expectation of marriage. She broke it off, she broke the condition and expectation. Even if it was the guy who broke it off, the ring was a “regular” gift but one based on an expected return (in this case, marriage), and he would still get the ring back. She’s coming off not only as selfish and ignorant, but cruel, someone who cares more about money and value than social relationships.</p>