Wedding Cancelled .... being taken to court!

Poppie68

OP you insist it was a gift and therefore you shouldn't have to pay it back...apart from you agreeing to pay in writing..this gift was made on the asssumption you were marrying their son and was a very nice thing for them to do in the first place.
You broke your promise to marry their son and now they are out of pocket to the tune of £1000..i would be inclined to let the £50 for the church fees go(you called the wedding off) and pay the full £1000 even if in instalments..but as they are requesting £500 you need to pay up.
None of this mess is their fault and they need to be put back in the same position they were in before.
You also need to return the ring as it was given in contemplation of marriage so should be returned to your jilted groom.

arcon5

So the wedding planning overwhelmed you... Was this really reason for the whole relationship to completely break down? Surely if you was in love something could have been worked

vaio

Nobody seems to have mentioned getting the deposit back from the venue.

A "very popular" venue should have no problem re-selling a date 18 months in the future which will reduce the amount of the deposit they can retain to the payment for the work they have already done on the OP's wedding.

Given the wedding was planned for 18 months time this won't be much more than a bit of admin, writing the receipt out etc, maybe £100 worth

antrobus

Poppie68 wrote: »

....You also need to return the ring as it was given in contemplation of marriage so should be returned to your jilted groom.

If you're talking about the engagement ring then, no, the legal presumption is that it is an outright gift.

See s3(2) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1970

The gift of an engagement ring shall be presumed to be an absolute gift; this presumption may be rebutted by proving that the ring was given on the condition, express or implied, that it should be returned if the marriage did not take place for any reason.

terra_ferma

cookie365 wrote: »

Sometimes it's a lawyer's job to tell their client what they need to hear, not what they want to hear.

We can happily tell you any old rubbish if that's what you want from us. But there's no point in asking us for legal advice, because you've already had it.

Was about to say exactly the same thing

Poppie68

antrobus wrote: »

If you're talking about the engagement ring then, no, the legal presumption is that it is an outright gift.

See s3(2) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1970

The gift of an engagement ring shall be presumed to be an absolute gift; this presumption may be rebutted by proving that the ring was given on the condition, express or implied, that it should be returned if the marriage did not take place for any reason.

Thanks....would be nice to think though in this day and age of 'The bigger the diamond the better' the bride to be (if she has done the jilting) would believe it morally right to return the ring.

duchy

Would it also be morally right that if the groom and his parents insisted on going ahead and paying the deposit when the bride wasn't happy for them to do it-they should take the financial hit.

Ultimately no-one is fully in the right. Any gifts between the couple-are just that- gifts -the ring legally is the OP's and nothing to stop her selling it to fund her half of the deposit.

The fact he is demanding gifts back puts him in a bad light and setting Mummy on the OP is a sure sign the OP made the right decision about not marrying this Man-Child. If he signed the agreement with the hotel-why is his mother involved in the court case anyway ?

steampowered

I disagree with the other contributors. If the parents went ahead and paid the deposit for a venue you can't afford without your consent, then I don't see why you should pay.

Legally, you should only have to repay if you gave your consent to this BEFORE the deposit was paid. If you gave your consent AFTER the deposit paid there is no legally binding contract. This is because there was no 'consideration' - refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consideration_in_English_law#Past_conduct.

If you want to fight this you need to file a simple Defence with the court within the proper deadlines.

thespiderspeed

vaio wrote: »

Nobody seems to have mentioned getting the deposit back from the venue.

A "very popular" venue should have no problem re-selling a date 18 months in the future which will reduce the amount of the deposit they can retain to the payment for the work they have already done on the OP's wedding.

Given the wedding was planned for 18 months time this won't be much more than a bit of admin, writing the receipt out etc, maybe £100 worth

I am surprised that only a couple of people have mentioned this. The Ex-fiance and his mother should be recovering the deposit from the venue first before they sue the OP for any losses. Even if she has offered to pay half the deposit, wouldn't this only be half of the actual losses and not the full £1000 deposit.

Poppie68

The op did agree to it though before they went ahead and booked it, regardless of her not being 100% happy, if she didn't want them to do it she should of just said no.