What do you think about the fact that a man gives his wife a house and is asked for rent after the d

1. Giving the house to someone else is someone else's property, and it is also the result of an agreement between two people, the man did not leave the property that did not belong to him, and he encountered the real problem of his ex-wife asking for rent, which belongs to two people.

A successful divorce is the result of negotiation between two people, and living under the same roof is a condition for the two people to temporarily form a reality for the two people, and it is also that the man does not have a suitable place to live.

The ex-wife asking for rent is also chasing her ex-husband, after all, divorce already means that there is no relationship, and they can't be good friends, so they only have to care about each other's distance.

The ex-wife is using the most realistic way to achieve the existence of her ex-husband's departure, and it is also a reason to create a reason for her ex-husband to find his own stable accommodation quickly.

Second, the conditions for divorce are already the consensus distance between the two people, the woman has the right to be unreasonable, and she also has the right to choose the realistic direction, and she also has the right to refuse the man to continue to send people under the fence, which is a reasonable way, and the man just meets his ex-wife who is not emotional.

On the day when the property became his ex-wife, the man had lost the right to live in it, and he could still be taken in by his ex-wife when he had no other residence, and he was unwilling to treat his ex-husband too much.

Asking for rent is implying that the ex-husband will either leave or endure the financial conditions, and it is time for the ex-husband to have his own house as soon as possible.

Asking for rent means that the ex-husband is disturbing to live again.

Third, after the divorce, they all have their own real world, and they all have their own lives, and living together is a realistic path of economic restrictions, and not disliking and being able to be okay with each other is also the best existence of divorce, but it is not the best in the future.

Asking for rent is a deliberate refusal to distance each other now, and it also belongs to the intention to create that each other should not be able to see each other every day, and it is also a request caused by bored thinking.

The ex-husband realized his ex-wife's attitude and should be able to deal with the final practical problem, and if he chooses to swallow his anger and pay the rent, he has no other way out, and he chooses to leave unreasonably because he sees his familiar friends clearly.

The ex-wife asks for rent, and the ex-husband knows how to advance and retreat.

The man's actions constituted an offence because the house had become the property of his wife and he was not required to pay rent.

I think the man is a little too generous, and since they are all given to his wife, then this house has nothing to do with him.

I think this wife is so weird. She should be a person who loves money very much, and she doesn't value feelings, so she will do this.

I think the man's approach is too immoral, you gave this house to your wife, why do you charge the rent?

I think that after the man gave the house to his wife, the house belongs to the wife, and it has nothing to do with the man, if it is not a gift relationship, it belongs to the joint property of the husband and wife, and it is normal to ask for rent after divorce.

Normal. When the two were together, the man was willing to share it with his wife, but after the divorce, the two had no relationship, and it was normal to ask for rent.

This kind of wife is the scum of society, this man loves her so much, he doesn't know how to cherish it, and he doesn't want to ask for a man's rent, no wonder people don't like to get married now, and when they meet such a person, they regret it all their lives.

Since this man gave the house to his wife, he should not ask for the house after the divorce, and should be generous.

The Changsha man gave the house to his wife, and after the divorce, he asked for rent, and his wife could not ask for it. Although the man gave the property to his wife, he did not need to pay rent for the joint use of his wife's property after marriage, and the two did not have a rental agreement, so there would be no rent, so it was impossible for the wife to ask for rent. The house originally belonged to a famous Changsha man, but before getting married, he gave it to his wife, but after getting married, the two lived in this house together, which was a matter of marriage.

The things in the marriage, whether it is expenses or income, are shared by the two of them, so it is impossible for the wife to ask for much rent. Next, I will talk about the main reason why my wife can't pay rent.

1. The house in which the two people live together is the joint property and joint debts arising from the marriage of two people, which can be divided equally after the divorce, but the house in which the marriage is lived does not matter, and neither the woman's nor the man's need for the other party to pay the rent. Even if there is such an agreement between the two people, it will be necessary for the woman to bear half of this rent. Not to mention that this Changsha man's house was given to his wife, and it was impossible to generate rent in the process.

2. The Changsha man and his wife did not sign a rental agreementThe Changsha man and his wife did not sign a rental agreement, so the two of them did not form a rental relationship. Then we can conclude that the house was provided by the wife to the Changsha man for living in free of charge, so it will not incur the cost of renting, and the rent demanded by the wife after the divorce is unreasonable.

3. The law will not support the wife's request, although the house has been given to his wife by the Changsha man, but the use of the house during the marriage belongs to the joint use of both parties. Therefore, the man also has the right to use the wife's unilateral property. Therefore, the law will not support the wife's claim for rent after the divorce.

What do you think about this?

The wife did not ask for rent, although they had signed a prenuptial agreement to give the house to the wife, but there was no transfer of ownership, and the wife did not have ownership of the house now. So he doesn't have to pay the rent.

The Changsha man gave the house to his wife, and after the divorce, he asked for rent, I think the seventh son can be wanted, after all, it was given to the woman by the Changsha man when the relationship was good.

I think it's okay to ask for it, because since it has been given to the wife, then the wife who is the wife of the house has the corresponding rights.

The wife can ask for it, because her ex-husband has already given her the house before, and the house is her personal property, and the property can not be returned.

It needs to be handled in accordance with legal procedures, because gift contracts also fall under the scope of legal protection. However, in this case, since the house was still in the process of being repaid, it was impossible to handle the transfer of property rights, so the gift contract had not actually been executed. At the same time, the woman did not repay the mortgage with the husband in accordance with the gift contract, so at the legal level, the court of second instance has rejected the court of first instance's ruling to pay rent.

I think it can be determined by legal procedure, and I think that this wife has the right to transfer the title but not the right to claim rent.

As for the fact that a man gave a house to his wife and was asked for rent in the divorce, of course, it should be judged in accordance with the legal procedure, and since it is handed over to the law, let the law decide.

Regarding the case of a man donating a house to his wife and being asked for rent in the divorce, it should be judged according to the legal procedure, because they did not make a detailed division of property after the divorce, and they now have property disputes, so I think that only by going through the legal process can it be more fair and just.

According to the legal procedure, the house is the joint property of the husband and wife, so the wife has no right to claim rent from the man, and the house will be revalued and divided equally between the two people.

No, because at that time the man gave it to his wife voluntarily, and the house belonged to his wife, and now they are divorced, unrelated people, and it is normal to collect rent.

I think that the wife is suspected of fraud, and the boy should protect himself and not be unable to control the woman when he sees it.

I don't think it is a fraud that a man gave a house to his wife and asked for rent after he divorced him, this is a promise made by the man when the two are in love, and he should not go back on his word, and his words do not count.

The wife may be suspected of fraud. But I think this matter still has to be resolved in law, after all, it involves the interests of two people.