"Why would you ruin perfectly good peanuts by adding candy corn? That's like saying hey, I have these awesome nachos, guess I better add some dryer lint." - Nonny
Fields, I have spoken off the record with friends on the police force. The rings are mine, he has to give them back or face legal action.
I'm going to talk to him tonight for the first time in two and a half weeks. I'm going to tell him I want them back and see what happens. I'm seething. The later it gets, the more pissed off I get.
He's a dumbass for leaving his read receipts on. I have screen shots of him reading the iMessages.
It would NEVER have occurred to me to take ANYTHING of his.
I think that he took the rings so you will HAVE to talk to him. He's just spoiling for a fight.
I think that you are exactly right.
The longer I sit at work, the more pissed off I get. I tore the house and garage apart this morning looking for them. His ring is also gone. I'm guessing he took them out of the house. Either that or my CSI skills are not as awesome as I think.
I think that he took the rings so you will HAVE to talk to him. He's just spoiling for a fight.
I think that you are exactly right.
The longer I sit at work, the more pissed off I get. I tore the house and garage apart this morning looking for them. His ring is also gone. I'm guessing he took them out of the house. Either that or my CSI skills are not as awesome as I think.
I wonder if his parents or a sibling are holding on to them for him.
Post by shostakovich on Feb 27, 2014 20:14:59 GMT -5
What a childish thing to do. Remember this every time you start to feel bad or want to take it easy on him - he clearly was not thinking of your feelings when he took those rings. Or, he was, but he was thinking of how to hurt them.
Tell him they are not considered an asset of the marriage. They are personal property. Given as a gift in anticipation of a contract of marriage. Marriage was held and consummated, at which point they became your personal property...consideration in the consummation of the contract of marriage. (Not a lawyer but I'd totally tell my ex this...and it wouldn't be a lie.)
Yeah. No. In CA the engagement ring is a gift unless it's an heirloom of his family's. The wedding band CAN be considered a join asset though. But he'd have the burden of proof whether it was bought with joint money.
He's fucking with you on purpose. Don't get into a text war with him.
I'd probably let him know that you have informed your attorney that he has stolen them.
Post by montereybride on Feb 27, 2014 20:24:04 GMT -5
His last "I will speak with my lawyer tomorrow. And if he says they are yours, then I will put them back in your jewelry box. I am not trying to be mean or vindictive M. I am simply trying to protect our mutual assets."
BULLSHIT. He is trying to be vindictive. He thinks you're going to sell them? I call BS. And why is *he* trying to protect assets? Who's to say he's not going to try to sell them, right? So, is he going to take your wardrobe and shoes next? I'm now firmly on file a police report and show up with a sheriff to get your rings back. And clean out all the bank accounts and put the money somewhere "safe" because it's still joint money. But then I'm a vindictive bitch who wants to nut-sac-punch him right now for you.
Post by themoneytree on Feb 27, 2014 20:29:58 GMT -5
Holy shit. I am furious on your behalf. I suppose it's good that he is showing you how he intends to proceed so you can prepare and protect yourself. Fuck him man.
Engagement Rings California does not view engagement rings as gifts but rather that they are given for the other person’s promise of marriage (CA Civil Code section 1590). If the couple actually marries, the recipient (normally the bride), has completed her promise and the engagement ring is hers. When the parties divorce, the engagement ring, having become the property of the bride before marriage, it remains her separate property and would not be divided as part of the divorce.
Wedding Rings and Anniversiary Unfortunately wedding bands and rings bought after the wedding day (anniversiary rings, upgraded rings, etc.), are not as clear cut as engagement rings. The rules of marital property and conversion of property (called “transmutation”) have to be taken into account. Wedding bands purchased before the wedding day and given at the ceremony are the property of the buyer until the wedding. The spouses aren’t married and their money is separate. At the wedding each buying spouse gives (transfers) a wedding band to the other spouse voluntarily. But is there consideration – are wedding rings given for a promise to stay married?
Normally, the original wedding bands are treated as an exchange of gifts. The wedding is a separate exchange of promises. This makes sense if we think of couples that can’t afford a wedding ring or the cost of different couples’ rings. If a couple doesn’t have a wedding ring are they not married after the ceremony? That wouldn’t be fair. If one couple can afford a very expensive ring is their promise to stay married stronger than a couple who can only afford an inexpensive ban? Also ridiculous. The treatment of the original wedding bands as gifts isn’t stated that way in the statutes nor is there a settled law on the issue. However, if the rings were treated as an exchange for being married, that would be a contract that would appear to trade personal servitude or sex for a gift of an asset and would be patently illegal.
That's the same site I found when researching my rights to my rings. Because exH was trying to insist that we split them 50/50 if I sold them.
So I put language in our separation agreement that specified that if I sold them, I would give him half the value of the wedding and anniversary bands (which are probably worth less than $500 total) but that the engagement ring (1ct. solitaire) is 100% mine.