Money Moral Dilemma: Do I give a gift when it's a 'pretend' wedding?

Pollycat

NBLondon said:

Amazing how people are leaping to conclusions about the groom's motivation...

Perhaps we need to separate the terms "marriage" - the legal thing and "wedding" - the event.   As Welshwizard points out - you can have a Humanist wedding and a civil marriage as two sperate events and the latter is optional.

There might be a very good reason the divorce hasn't come through and the family are going through with the celebration, the reception etc. with the legal niceties to be added later.  Which is fine as long as a) no-one is deceived and b) they don't expect more money at a later stage.

I'm sure there is a very good reason why the divorce hasn't come through.

People working from home, no face-to-face meetings.

I've no idea how the law courts (if they are involved) have been working through covid.

But the author of the dilemma has been clear:

MSE_Laura_F said:

This week's MoneySaver who wants advice asks...

I'm going to a family 'wedding' that has been years in the planning while the groom waited for his divorce to go through from his previous marriage. The couple have told the family he's now divorced and the wedding is going ahead, and they've asked for money as a wedding present. But I've found out that the divorce isn't through yet, so it won't be an official ceremony in law and is probably little more than a party in reality.

So if they are telling friends and family that he is divorced but he isn't, surely that is being deceitful?

I've not leapt to any conclusions about anyone's motivation.

I've simply read the words in the dilemma and that - at least to me - says deceit about the groom's marital situation.

I'd be more than happy to attend a celebration of a wedding in the knowledge that timescales got screwed up and the legal thing can't actually take place as planned. And I'd take a gift.

It's the telling people the groom is divorced when that isn't true that doesn't sit quite right with me.

74jax

Pollycat said:

GaleSF63 said:

Pollycat said:

adventerous_tea said:

Like someone else has previously said, they could’ve had a date set for the divorce which has been pushed back for whatever reason, so they’re still going ahead with the celebration but then doing the official service another time with just a few witnesses. Personally I would get them either a gift or money whichever you would do for a wedding now. Then in the future if they have a second celebration and ask for a second gift I wouldn’t get one then. 

As for people saying people now ask for money, I understand not wanting to receive gifts you ultimately don’t like/want and don’t want them to just get thrown out. Money means you can get something you actually want, or spend it on a honeymoon as most people already have a home set up. However people shouldn’t judge the amount people give 😊 

But why lie to the family?

Why not be up-front and say 'we're really disappointed that Joe's divorce hasn't come through as soon as we expected it to and we've made all the plans now so it won't be an actual ceremony but we're still having the party and we'd still like you to come and celebrate it with us'?

MSE_Laura_F said:

This week's MoneySaver who wants advice asks...

I'm going to a family 'wedding' that has been years in the planning while the groom waited for his divorce to go through from his previous marriage. The couple have told the family he's now divorced and the wedding is going ahead, and they've asked for money as a wedding present. But I've found out that the divorce isn't through yet, so it won't be an official ceremony in law and is probably little more than a party in reality.

Why not be honest?

Thinking about it, this MMD doesn't make sense.

How can you have people attending a wedding that isn't official?

Won't someone notice that it isn't "an official ceremony in law"?

I went to a "wedding" that wasn't real. It had been planned and arranged on the basis the legalities would all be sorted out by that date, but they weren't. However everything went ahead as planned, including the church service, and I couldn't see the difference. It wasn't kept secret though; everyone knew it wasn't a legal ceremony and of course the usual certificates etc. weren't produced and signed. The vicar was quite happy to do it like that. 

The legal bit took place when it was able to, without any fuss. I suppose it was a bit like what people are doing now because of Covid, only the other way round - having the ceremony quietly and planning a big do when it's possible. 

Some people have a church ceremony and a big do to renew their vows - no legal stuff there either. 

Perhaps he has his decree nisi and calls that being divorced, on the basis the absolute will be through before the wedding date. 

If that is the case, the author of the dilemma is wrong and there isn't an issue with the groom's marital status.

And there isn't a dilemma.

This made me smile. Come on pollycat, it's mse dilemmas.... When is there ever a dilemma. 

Aberbud

If you want to give a gift, give a gift.  If you don’t, don’t. 

Wedding gifts were originally intended as a way to help new couples set up a new home.  I always think it is strange when couples who have lived together for years decide, for whatever reason, to marry and then expect a gift.  What do they want - another dinner service, kettle, double bed?

I liked the previous suggestion that the ideal gift for a pretend wedding is a pretend gift (aka an empty box). 

pixiebel81

Brigantia4444 said:

Oh-oh!

Does the poor fiancee know her potential 'spouse' isn't legitimate?? Sounds very dodgy to me.

And what about the deserted wife?

Why are you proposing to give gifts of money or anything to such a man? Is he also deserting his children, too? Is he hoping for your money to pay the maintenance for them?

Divorce 'problems' probably mean he's not playing fair with his wife, whilst stringing this other lady along. Sounds like he has 'form': he may even bounce back to his wife (again) when he gets bored with this 'fiancee'.

None of this is real until it's legal, in ink on paper.

So? Give nothing, apart from some advice to the fiancee to do some overdue background checking on this paramour (and to also maybe....just have a quiet, civilised coffee with the wife). It's all way too fishy to be true.

Honestly, you can't be too careful, when someone is showing this much lack of respect for the basic rules of marriage and fair play to everyone.

Good luck.

What a bizarre post. Where exactly does it say he deserted his wife and doesn't intend to pay child maintenance for the children we have no idea exist?

For all we know she cheated on him and held up the divorce out of spite.

Ringo90

Pollycat said:

So if they are telling friends and family that he is divorced but he isn't, surely that is being deceitful?

No, not "surely". You keep saying that we have to stick to the few facts we have from the post, but the post doesn't mention the groom being deceitful on purpose. I'm sure if that was the case, the OP would be reflecting about that, and not about the gift.
It might be there was a set date for the divorce, and for simplicity, he told the family it was done. But then something has gone wrong beyond his will and it might even be he told the honest truth afterwards, and that's how the OP found out. So just as you say: we only know he told the family he was divorced, but then he isn't YET. Because yeah, the OP mentions "yet". You are assuming that he is being deceitful all along, a legitimate assumption, but NOT a fact.
Whatever might be the reason behind his "lie", what matters to me is that he is not taking advantage of it. As far as the people he invited are concerned, they are having a marriage party. So if they attend, they gift. Even if he was going to get legally divorced and legally married later, obviously he wouldn't be asking for gifts again. The party only happens once. So it's not like he was deceiving people to get double gifts or to get gifts at all.

It seems to me that the OP is not bothered by the lie, they just hope they can avoid buying the gift with the excuse that the marriage is not legal. Which is absolutely petty.

Pollycat

Ringo90 said:

Pollycat said:

So if they are telling friends and family that he is divorced but he isn't, surely that is being deceitful?

No, not "surely". You keep saying that we have to stick to the few facts we have from the post, but the post doesn't mention the groom being deceitful on purpose. I'm sure if that was the case, the OP would be reflecting about that, and not about the gift.
It might be there was a set date for the divorce, and for simplicity, he told the family it was done. But then something has gone wrong beyond his will and it might even be he told the honest truth afterwards, and that's how the OP found out. So just as you say: we only know he told the family he was divorced, but then he isn't YET. Because yeah, the OP mentions "yet". You are assuming that he is being deceitful all along, a legitimate assumption, but NOT a fact.
Whatever might be the reason behind his "lie", what matters to me is that he is not taking advantage of it. As far as the people he invited are concerned, they are having a marriage party. So if they attend, they gift. Even if he was going to get legally divorced and legally married later, obviously he wouldn't be asking for gifts again. The party only happens once. So it's not like he was deceiving people to get double gifts or to get gifts at all.

It seems to me that the OP is not bothered by the lie, they just hope they can avoid buying the gift with the excuse that the marriage is not legal. Which is absolutely petty.

The post does mention the groom being deceitful.

That's enough for me.

It clearly isn't enough for you.

I'm happy with any assumptions I've made.

According to the original post, they are not having a marriage party.

The author of the dilemma has been invited to a wedding.

There is a difference.

MSE_Laura_F said:

This week's MoneySaver who wants advice asks...

I'm going to a family 'wedding' that has been years in the planning while the groom waited for his divorce to go through from his previous marriage. The couple have told the family he's now divorced and the wedding is going ahead, and they've asked for money as a wedding present. But I've found out that the divorce isn't through yet, so it won't be an official ceremony in law and is probably little more than a party in reality.

If the people he invited to his wedding think it is a wedding, they believe they are invited to a wedding.

Even the author of the dilemma says:

"...is probably little more than a party in reality."

I can't speak for the author of the dilemma but in the same situation, my issue is very clear:

Pollycat said:

I'd be more than happy to attend a celebration of a wedding in the knowledge that timescales got screwed up and the legal thing can't actually take place as planned. And I'd take a gift.

It's the telling people the groom is divorced when that isn't true that doesn't sit quite right with me.

gloriouslyhappy

Littledaler said:

It doesn't take "years" to obtain a divorce.  It's outrageous that this man is lying to his friends.  I hope his partner knows she won't be his legal wife.  I think this guy hasn't put any effort into obtaining a divorce, he likes being married to his first wife and having this second life - shame on him.  As for having a "celebration" of a non-wedding - I would tell him he's getting a non-present and that the real present is for his real wedding.  Oh and I'd consider ditching this guy as a "friend" - he obviously doesn't know the meaning of the word.

It can take years to obtain a divorce, not all ex's are willing to sign the papers when issued them, and can hold proceedings up for ages, especially if children or property is involved. Where do you get this 'I think this guy hasn't put any effort into obtaining a divorce, he likes being married to his first wife and having this second life - shame on him' from? You're reading a lot into the original post. Have you considered the information OP got about the divorce not coming through might perhaps be inaccurate?

TBagpuss

It's also possible that the divorce will be through by the time the wedding event takes place.
I'm curious as to how the OP has found out and whether they've asked for any clarification.

For me, it would make a difference whether it's a minor issue with timings (e.g. they've planned a party, the paperwork won't be in order but they fully expect and intend to be able to get to the registry office shortly after the event) or whether they have just decided to have the party and the divorce may still drag on for ages and they may not marry.

Like others, it would be being lied to which would put my back up.

So - if you go to the party and feel like giving a gift, give a gift. It doesn't have to be money, you get to chose what you give. 

If you don't feel like giving a gift, don't, or give something closer to what you'd take as a gift if they were just hosting a party, rather than a wedding.

Stuff does happen. I once went to the wedding of a relative of mine and found out some time later that the actual legal marriage had taken place about 8 weeks earlier. In their case, the wedding was brought forward for complicated reasons relating to visas and specific jobs in their profession.

The priest who married them (both times!) was aware of and happy with the situation, and they made the very practical decision that it would be very difficult to try to move the date at such short notice, particularly for the guests coming from overseas.

Herts_Julie

74jax said:

I'm one of these people where if I'm invited round to a friends for a dinner party I'd take a bottle of wine, if I was invited to a bbq I'd take something too.

I'd definately take something to a party, regardless what it was. I don't 'do' cards, but I'd take something.

Equally though, if I was hosting 'something' i wouldn't mind in the slightest if friends came empty handed.

Everyone does their own thing.

I'm not well at the minute and a friend popped to check up on me for 5mins and brought a plant, maybe it's just me and my friends... 

I agree with 74jax, if I had been invited for dinner then I would have taken bottles of drink, and flowers or a small gift.  If you are attending this party but don't want to gift money, then take along a present - maybe a really bottle of decent champagne to toast their intended commitment.  As others have said, as long as you aren't going to be asked to chip in again for another ceremony, then be happy for them and attend the event, happy in the knowledge that you kept up with convention and don't appear stingy.  Maybe the estranged/former spouse has agreed to the divorce but the couple have yet to receive the decree absolute and paperwork?  Or even they have plans to marry legally overseas - good luck with that one in current times - and this is the only wedding you are expected to attend.  It sounds a bit premature to organise a wedding if they can't legally go through with it but ignore this and just relish being with friends and family after 2 years of not being able to party/dance the night away. 

Malthusian

Aberbud said:

Wedding gifts were originally intended as a way to help new couples set up a new home.  I always think it is strange when couples who have lived together for years decide, for whatever reason, to marry and then expect a gift.

The standard wording is "We don't expect gifts but if you would like to give something, here is a link to our donation page / honeymoon fund."