Inspired by the following Reddit post.
My parents gave each of my brothers $50,000 when they graduated from university as a downpayment on their home. When I graduated they did not do the same for me. I asked about it and they said my husband should provide. I wasn't married. I still lived at ho...
I remember reading elsewhere on this site that transfers between family members are usually assumed to be gifts, unless there's explicit documentation of a contract. I don't think a verbal understanding of how the funds are to be used would count. Can't find the link, though.
law.stackexchange.com/a/11013/576 says this in a different context, and the poster has mentioned it in several others of their answers. No citations given, though.
Now wondering if that would be considered "financial abuse" in some places. Either way, if you win the case you're never seeing your grandchildren .. unless you make that a condition of your will, I suppose. Appallingly discriminatory behavior either way.
What century were your parents born in? That answer about "your husband should provide" is archaic in the western world, although I wouldn't be surprised if this attitude still persists in the Muslim world, India, and China.
I know some parents who gave each of their daughters $10k when they got married and told them to use it however they want - big fancy wedding, small wedding with only family and buy a house/car/whatever - whatever they wanted to use it for. They only asked (not demanded!) that they be invited to the wedding as well.
You can sue anybody for anything, and you can almost always find a lawyer who will take your money. Suing isn't what matters: the Court's decision is what matters. It's also worthwhile to consider the saying: "a verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on".
Spending $50K on a wedding means that in ONE DAY all that money is gone forever. I know there are always lots of people with their hands out when it comes to weddings but $50K is, IMHO, insane. Putting $50K toward a home make far more sense in my mind at least. Why would you be foolish enough to sue?
I'm pretty sure the original question is a massive flamebait troll, so I don't think it makes sense to discuss the motives and reasonableness of the "people" involved. It's still an interesting hypothetical though.
@jwh20 where are you located? The weddings I'm familiar with take a lot more than one day, including e.g. fitting for the wedding attires, recruiting bridesmaids, etc. One can even argue the honeymoon is part of the wedding.
@Allure, you know very well what jwh20 meant. Sure, you pay the money out in the weeks leading up to the wedding, but the ceremony itself is only one day, and once the party is over the money is all gone.
Discussion on question by Allure: If …
Discussion on question by Allure: If …