Buying a house and a car when you are in love, what should I do after breaking up？
Illustration Wang Chen Jun
Transfer money during love, do you need to return it after breaking up? Buying a wedding room and registering your girlfriend’s name is a gift or a joint house purchase? Buying a car before marriage is a bride price or a gift. Can I ask for a return after breaking up? Recently, Haidian court tried many such cases, and the judge explained them in detail and gave a prompt.
Case:
Forced by his girlfriend to write an iou? If "coercion" is not proved, it will be returned.
Xiao Na said that during her love with Xiaolei, Xiaolei borrowed 600,000 yuan from her on the grounds of revolving business, and then repaid 30,000 yuan. In July 2015, Xiaolei issued a debit note to her, promising to repay it at maturity, but failed to fulfill the repayment promise after the expiration. She repeatedly urged for no results, so she sued Xiaolei for repaying the loan principal of 570,000 yuan and paying interest.
During the trial, Xiao Na submitted the IOUs and transfer records to the court. The content of the loan shows: "Xiaolei borrowed 600,000 yuan from Xiaona today, and has already paid back 30,000 yuan, leaving 570,000 yuan to be paid off before October 2015. On July 30, 2015, the borrower Xiao Lei. " According to the personal account statement of Xiao Na Bank, Xiao Na transferred RMB 600,000 to Xiaolei from 2014 to 2015 by mobile phone.
Xiaolei recognized the transfer record, but said that he and Xiao Na were originally in love, and they often transferred money to each other during their love. He did not borrow money from Xiaona. The two parties originally planned to hold a wedding in August 2015, but a few days before the wedding, Xiao Na and several people forced him to write this IOU.
The court held that according to the evidence submitted by Xiao Na, it can be concluded that there is a private loan relationship between her and Xiaolei, and Xiaolei should fulfill the repayment obligation, but the failure to repay all the loans so far has constituted a breach of contract. Xiaolei claimed that the IOU was issued under the coercion of Xiao Na, but no evidence was provided, so the court refused to accept it. Finally, the court ordered Xiaolei to repay Xiao Na’s loan of 570,000 yuan and pay corresponding interest.
The judge suggested that the lender should keep the payment voucher.
Hu Meiqing of Haidian Court said that it is very common for lovers to transfer money to each other. After the relationship ends, it is not uncommon for one party to advocate "transferring money to borrow money" and sue. Because many lovers write IOUs to each other for emotional reasons, but no loans actually occur, it is more complicated to identify such loan relationships.
Is it a loan relationship to transfer money during the relationship? The judge believes that the party who advocates the establishment of the loan relationship generally bears the burden of proof on whether the loan relationship is true and the actual delivery of the loan. Therefore, it is particularly important for lenders to keep relevant payment vouchers. Borrowing between lovers, it is best to leave traces by means of transfer, etc., and at the same time pay attention to keeping the bank’s running water and transaction records. If you need to pay a large amount of cash, you should keep the bank’s withdrawal records, and if necessary, you should ask the other party to issue an iou or sign a loan agreement.
Case:
Before marriage, the court awarded 50% of the property rights under the name of one registered person.
Another pair of lovers, Zhou Yang and Li Ting, have been dating since they were in college, and they broke up in 2015. In October 2012, the two parties jointly invested to buy a house in Haidian District, Beijing. Because Zhou Yang was not qualified to buy a house at that time, they negotiated and signed a sales contract with the real estate company in the name of Li Ting. After that, Zhou Yang paid the down payment of 1,588,519 yuan, the purchase price of 160,000 yuan, and Li Ting paid the remaining house price of 440,000 yuan. The house was registered in the name of Li Ting. On June 30, 2016, after obtaining the qualification to buy a house, Zhou Yang contacted Li Ting to handle the house transfer, but Li Ting ignored it. Zhou Yang found out that she planned to sell the house through an intermediary company.
In this regard, Zhou Yang believes that the joint purchase of a house by both parties and Li Ting’s unauthorized sale have seriously infringed on their legitimate rights and interests, so he sued his ex-girlfriend and demanded that the house be divided according to law, with himself and Li Ting accounting for 78.3% and 21.7% respectively.
However, Li Ting said that the house was registered in her personal name and belonged to personal property, and Zhou Yang had no right to divide it; Moreover, the purchase price paid by Zhou Yang is a gift to her, and there is no common property between the two parties.
During the trial, both of them said that they intended to buy a house as a wedding room, but later they broke up due to emotional reasons, and the house has been occupied by Li Ting. The court held that it was an act of jointly purchasing property with marriage intention to jointly invest and buy a house in the name of Li during their love. Now the two sides have failed to get married and end their love relationship, and the purpose of buying a house has been impossible to achieve. Although the property right is registered in the name of the woman, it should still be recognized as common property. In the end, the court ruled that the house was jointly owned by two people, with each party holding 50% of the property rights, and Li Ting assisted Zhou Yang in the registration of the property rights.
The judge suggested that buying a house together during love is regarded as common property.
It is more and more common to buy a house jointly before marriage. Hu Meiqing believes that houses, cars and furniture jointly invested by both parties during the period of love should be regarded as common property. At the termination of the joint ownership relationship, the division of the joint property shall be handled according to the agreement if there is an agreement, and if there is no agreement, the factors such as the contribution of the co-owners, the contribution to the joint property and the actual needs of the co-owners in production and life shall be considered. In order to avoid disputes in the future, we should be cautious in buying a house together during the period of love. We can sign a capital contribution agreement in advance to stipulate their respective shares, and at the same time, we should keep relevant evidence such as bank transfer records and payment vouchers.
Case:
Buying a car, registering in the name of the prospective mother-in-law, breaking up, and the court awarded the refund of the car.
A couple decided to get married. Li Wen said that he spent 226,856.9 yuan to buy an SUV as a wedding gift at the request of his girlfriend Zhang Xia. Because they were not qualified to buy a car in Beijing, they registered the car in the name of Zhang Xia’s mother Wang. However, the two sides broke up soon due to personality and other reasons. Li Wen’s request for Zhang Xia to return the car purchase fee was rejected, so he sued Zhang Xia’s mother and daughter for returning the engagement price of more than 230,000 yuan.
During the trial, Zhang Xia’s mother and daughter argued that there was no engagement between Li Wen and Zhang Xia, and the vehicle involved in the case that Li Wen invested and registered under Wang’s name was not an engagement bride price. Because of their long relationship, Li Wen mentioned breaking up many times. Before buying a car, Li Wen broke up with Zhang Xia again. This time, he proposed to buy a car for Zhang Xia to make up for his feelings. Moreover, when buying a car, the old car under Wang’s name is discounted to 8000 yuan, so the newly bought car also has Wang’s rights and interests, which should be divided before disposal. The used car has been depreciated and should not be returned at the new car price.
The court held that the car purchase money should belong to Li Wen’s expenditure for the purpose of marriage and has the nature of bride price. Although Zhang Xia’s mother and daughter claimed that Li Wen’s contribution was a gift, they did not provide sufficient evidence and the court did not support it. In view of their failure to get married, Li Wen has the right to demand that the other party return the corresponding expenses incurred for marriage. Regarding the amount of money to be refunded, it should be judged according to Li Wen’s actual expenses for purchasing the car. Finally, the court ruled that Zhang Xia’s mother and daughter returned Li Wen’s car purchase price of 232,983.79 yuan.
Judge’s tip: unmarried people ask for the support of the bride price court.
Hu Meiqing said that the phenomenon of paying bride price before marriage is a custom, which is popular in many parts of China. If both parties fail to go through the marriage registration formalities, and one party requests to return the bride price, it shall be supported. If unmarried men and women have indeed lived together but are not registered to get married in the end, the court can determine whether to return and the amount of the bride price according to the time of their living together, the amount of the bride price and the local rural customs and habits. In addition, the actual payers and recipients of the bride price are not limited to men and women themselves. If the actual recipients of the bride price are the parents of the woman or other people, when the man sues for the return of the bride price, the woman and the actual recipients can be listed as co-defendants. (The parties in the text are all pseudonyms) (Reporter Lin Jing)