Wife sparks debate after discovering husband used their joint account to pay for her engagement ring
gettyimages-sb10065886s-001-170667a.jpg
Engagement rings normally become a topic of debate when the receiver doesn’t like it, but one woman had a problem after she discovered she was paying for her own ring.
In a recent Reddit post shared to the popular “Am I The A**hole?” subreddit, a wife explained that she and her husband got married very quickly at the courthouse following the proposal and made the decision to put her almost $8,000 ring on a payment plan.
Soon after getting married, she discovered that he was withdrawing money from their joint account to pay for the ring, which the two of them have different opinions on.
“I was just taken aback and honestly put off by the fact he is making me pay for a GIFT he gave to me,” she wrote in her Reddit post.
“We have been having some arguments lately, and he feels that ring is a wedding expense, and it’s only fair that I contribute towards it too, and that as a woman of this day, I shouldn’t hesitate to be an equal partner. I call bulls*** and shared my thoughts on this whole thing.”
She explained that the recipient of a gift should never pay for it and then added that in “most modern societies” an engagement ring is considered a gift. “I’ve unintentionally partially paid for two installments now which makes me a part-owner of the ring,” the post continued.
The poster mentioned that had her husband discussed paying for the ring this way before purchasing it, she would’ve told him “no” because normally “jointly-owned” items require both parties to agree to it.
“So I can retroactively decide now I never wanted to own it and have been demanding that my husband returns the ring to the store if paying for the ring hurts his pocket so much,” the wife wrote.
“This caused him to flare up, and he berated me for being sexist towards him. I put my foot down not because I can’t afford it or I refuse to financially contribute or give my husband a nice gift, but my husband’s sheer stubbornness and tackiness about wanting me to pay is what p***es me off. I don’t mind splurging for him, but this whole situation has left a very bad taste in my mouth.”
After posting, many people left comments stating that there were wrongdoings from both her and her husband, as he should’ve communicated his price concerns to get her a ring she wanted, and she shouldn’t have “demanded” a ring that was that expensive.
“Yes, you should consent before being charged something. In further consideration, I could see how she should have consented to jointly paying, but there have been a few posts asking if all accounts were merged and this is the only account he can draw from,” one comment began.
“Overall, her logic is so off. She’s made two payments through the joint account, ‘so now she’s a part owner’ of the ring?? It was a gift, so wasn’t she always THE owner? Or did she maintain he owned the ring even if he gave it to her? To me, demanding someone gift you something you wouldn’t pay for yourself due to cost is scammy/bad faith/tacky – all things she’s accusing her new husband of being.”
“I’m not really sure I understand your reasoning,” another comment read. “If paying for something out of your joint account means you’re paying for it indirectly, and that makes it not a gift, then neither of you can ever give each other gifts again. Your finances are MERGED. What’s his is yours and yours is his. That’s how my wife and I function anyway.
“Because what he did seems relatively… normal? Buying the kind of ring your partner wants and financing it if you’re saving up for a house seems pretty standard, definitely not a ‘plot to get back at you’. It seems like he’s trapped in a no-win situation here.”
From news to politics, travel to sport, culture to climate – The Independent has a host of free newsletters to suit your interests. To find the stories you want to read, and more, in your inbox, click here.