Should the father in law pay back the money he borrowed from his daughter s family to marry his son?

The father-in-law should pay it back, it depends on how you agree, some rural areas use the daughter's dowry money to marry the son's daughter-in-law, so you should negotiate before borrowing money, if the money must be repaid, that is, the father-in-law will pay it back, and if you can't pay it back, you can only continue to pay it back to your son.

Answer: This kind of thing is best explained to the father-in-law and son when they are together, and finally make a decision, if the son has a heart, it will be fine, and there is no need for the father-in-law to say anything, in short, there is a quasi-plan, so as not to be able to deal with it in the future, and the family will not be in harmony and cannot end.

It is said that the father repays the debt, and the husband borrows the wife to repay, in the law, is such a debt legal? Once the other party sues, will the court support your claim?

Before his death, Liu was in the jade business, and in April 2014, he needed to borrow 1.5 million yuan from his friend Shen to buy jade. Who knew that disaster fell from the sky, Liu died in an accidental traffic in July of the same year, and his business also failed, leaving only his son to do odd jobs to support the family.

After Shen learned of Liu's death, he was embarrassed to ask Liu's family for a while, and when he met Liu's son a year later, he asked Liu's son Xiao Liu to return the loan of 1.5 million yuan. Who knew that Xiao Liu said: "I borrowed the money from Lao Tzu, you ask my Lao Tzu for it."

Shen was angry and took Xiao Liu to court.

Should Xiao Liu pay off the 1.2 million debt for his dead father?

The law does not have a provision for the repayment of father's debts and sons' debts, and the legal concept that father's debts and sons are still feudal societies has no legal basis in modern society. According to modern legal theory, the father and the son are two independent civil subjects, which are not mixed up by the existence of blood relations, and the father's debt has nothing to do with the son.

According to Article 33 of the Inheritance Law of the People's Republic of China, "the inheritance shall pay off the taxes and debts that the decedent shall pay in accordance with the law, and the payment of taxes and debts shall be limited to the actual value of his estate." The part exceeding the actual value of the estate shall not be subject to voluntary repayment by the heirs.

If the heir renounces the inheritance, he may not be liable for repaying the debts of the decedent.

Therefore, Liu did not have an inheritance left to Xiao Liu after his death, and Xiao Liu did not need to repay the 1.5 million yuan debt owed by his father during his lifetime.

If you want to pay it back, the daughter married and the property was divided into her husband's house, and the daughter has money to give to her parents to honor her parents, and she still has to distinguish it clearly.

I see that all of you are a family, all of you are brothers and sisters and parents, there is nothing that should not be said, I can only say that you should negotiate and deal with it yourself.

First of all, as a father-in-law, he lent his daughter's money to his son to marry his daughter-in-law, in this case, whether it is the father-in-law or the son, he must return it to his daughter.

Although she said that she was her own daughter, she did not have this obligation as a daughter, and took out the money to her brother, or her younger brother to marry. In fact, whether it is the son who pays back the money or the father-in-law who pays the money depends on the wishes of the daughter-in-law.

Because now that they are getting married, there are many girls who ask for a bride price, a house, a car, and three golds, etc., which cost a lot of money. The house and car are not to be said, because the woman's name is not added, so this belongs to the man, and there is no need to say anything, but the bride price is not available to many men's families, as the article said, your father-in-law can't take out this money for his son to marry a daughter-in-law, so he can only borrow money from his daughter, so in this case, as far as I am concerned, I think there should be a son to pay back.

Because who used the money to borrow it, of course, it was the son who used it, not that the father-in-law used it. So after getting married, of course, he should have a son to pay it back, after all, his father-in-law does not have the economic strength, if the father-in-law himself has the economic strength and money, then he still needs to borrow from his daughter? Now he borrowed money because he didn't have any money, but after borrowing money, what do you expect him to do as an old man to pay off the money?

As a son, if you are sensible, you should return this money to your father, don't let your father live so hard in old age, and have to earn money to pay off debts.

Of course, as a son, he has to explain his wife's thoughts. Let your daughter-in-law agree to help her father repay the money.

Should the father-in-law pay back the money he borrowed from his daughter's family to marry his son? If the father-in-law is not able to repay the money, the son should pay the money. Because it was money for his son to marry his daughter-in-law.

This borrowing. From the perspective of legal relations, it should be repaid by the borrower, that is, your father-in-law will repay the arrears of his daughter's family, and it does not matter what he uses the money.

Generally speaking, those who borrow to marry a daughter-in-law are sons who repay them, and their parents are not able to do so, so they can only say that they can help borrow and repay them themselves.

It depends on who the borrower is, who borrows and who repays.

I think whoever borrows money should pay it back.

Legal analysis: From a legal point of view, a daughter-in-law has no obligation to support her in-laws. But the son has the obligation to support his parents; A daughter-in-law is filial to her in-laws and fulfills her maintenance obligations on behalf of her husband.

Legal basis: Article 1067 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China Where parents fail to perform their obligation to support them, minor children or adult children who are unable to live independently have the right to demand that their parents pay child support. Parents who fail to fulfill their obligation to support their adult children, or who lack the ability to work or who have difficulties in living, have the right to demand maintenance from their adult children.

The father-in-law borrowed money from his daughter, which is not something that should not be done in itself. However, if the husband does not indicate a plan to repay the money after borrowing it, or deliberately borrows money even though he knows that he cannot afford to repay the loan, it is immoral.

In this case, instead of expressing gratitude for borrowing money, the father-in-law may take his daughter's kindness for granted, causing financial pressure and distress to his daughter. Such behavior will hurt family affection and damage family relationships, so it should be advocated and supported.

If the father-in-law is really unable to repay the loan, it is recommended to communicate more with his daughter, explain his financial situation clearly, and analyze the repayment plan. You can also seek support and assistance from family members or a third party to resolve the issue together. The most important thing is that all borrowers should pay off their debts as soon as possible to avoid further disputes and conflicts, and it is also a basic obligation to the lender.

Normally, there is borrowing and returning. But the specific affairs of the family depend on the situation, tolerate each other, and discuss well.

Legal analysis: The money borrowed from the parents must be repaid.

Legal basis: Civil Code of the People's Republic of China

Article 120:Where civil rights and interests are infringed upon, the infringed party has the right to request that the infringer bear tort liability.

Article 183:Where oneself is harmed by protecting the civil rights and interests of others, the infringer bears civil liability, and the beneficiary may give appropriate compensation. Where there is no infringer, the infringer has escaped, or is unable to bear civil liability, and the victim requests compensation, the beneficiary shall give appropriate compensation.

Article 1167:Where the tortious conduct endangers the safety of others' persons or property, the infringed party has the right to request that the infringer bear tortious liability such as stopping the infringement, removing obstructions, or eliminating dangers.

Article 1168:Where two or more persons jointly commit tortious acts, causing harm to others, they shall bear joint and several liability.

Summary. Hello, the parents borrowed money to buy a house and the son is obliged to repay the money, and a legal relationship between the parents and the son is formed. Parents have no obligation to support their adult children.

The father lends money to his son to buy a house and marry his daughter-in-law, does the son have to pay back?

Hello, the parents borrowed money to buy a house and the son is obliged to repay the money, and a legal relationship between the parents and the son is formed. Parents have no obligation to support their adult children.

According to Article 21 of the Marriage Law, parents have the obligation to raise and educate their children; Children have an obligation to support their parents. If the parents fail to fulfill the obligation to support them, the child who is a minor or who is unable to live independently has the right to demand maintenance from the parents. Parents who are unable to work or who have difficulties in living have the right to demand alimony from their children when they fail to perform their duties of support.

Infant drowning, infant abandonment and other acts of infant mutilation are prohibited. Where there is a clear expression of intent at the time of capital contribution, it shall be determined in accordance with the clear expression of intent. For example, if the parents' contribution is to lend money to their children to subsidize the purchase of a house, and evidence such as an IOU is written at that time, the parents' contribution is actually a legal relationship between the parents and the children; If it is true that the parents only want to lend money to their children, such lawful creditor's rights should be protected by law, and if the parents request the return, they shall return it.

How did you discuss when you got married, if your father wants you to repay the money, as a son, you have to repay the money, after all, your father borrowed money to buy a rock house for you to marry a daughter-in-law and a royal wife, and the son of the child should actively repay the money.

The money should be repaid, and the parents' contribution is voluntary, but it is not should, let alone the borrowed money, and the son has to repay the debt with his parents.

Legally, the mother-in-law borrowed the money for her son's marriage, should the daughter-in-law pay it back.

The family does not speak two words, but sits down and discusses, the parents should pay it back with their son, and when the parents are still able to work, they will also help the son, if the son is capable, he will not be paid back by his parents. There are real families who are all changed to be sons, and it is impossible to talk about it. If the parents have money, will it be between the money, the parents will take out the money and get it, it is related to the fact that the parents have no ability, it is cost-effective in a poor family, the parents only came up with the question, asked the son to pay it back, the parents for the sake of their son's marriage, but also dug up their own savings to take it out, it is not enough, the parents also find a way to go to the shed to borrow tens of thousands of dollars from others to get their son's wedding, the parents for the son, what do you want your parents to do for the son?

It is a filial son, a conscientious person, who should bear the money he borrowed for his wedding, and if your father and mother still have the ability to give you, he will help you.

Summary. 1. The money borrowed by parents should not be repaid by the children. Parents are generally persons with full capacity for civil conduct, and the money they borrow is repaid by themselves; However, if the child inherits the inheritance of the parents, the debts owed by the parents must be paid up to the actual value of the inheritance.

2. Legal basis: Article 18 of the Civil Code provides that adults are persons with full capacity for civil conduct and may independently carry out civil juristic acts. Minors over the age of 16 who rely on their own labor income as their main livelihood** are to be regarded as persons with full capacity for civil conduct.

Parents lend money to their daughters to their sons, and who should pay back the money.

Parents borrow money from others outside for their son, and then borrow money from their daughter to pay it back, should they borrow it?

Good. Roger that.

How not to say. Hello son, if he has disturbed the menstruation and has the ability to make money, of course, the son will pay it back by himself, after all, this money is also borrowed for his son Li Qianzi, so it is better for him to pay it back by himself, learn to bear it himself.

1. The money borrowed by parents should not be repaid by the children. The father and mother are generally persons with full capacity for civil conduct, and the money they borrow is repaid by themselves; However, if the child inherits the inheritance of the parents, the debts owed by the parents must be paid up to the actual value of the inheritance. 2. The law is based on the wheel

Article 18 of the Civil Code provides that adults are persons with full capacity for civil conduct and may independently carry out civil juristic acts. Minors over the age of 16 who rely on their own labor income as their main livelihood, are deemed to be persons with full capacity for civil conduct.

The money borrowed by the parents should not be repaid by the children, and the money owed by the parents should be repaid by the parents themselves.

A mother should not lend money to her daughter to marry a wife for her son.

1. Financial responsibility: As a creditor of the mother and son, the daughter will also face financial risks after lending money. When borrowing money without a clear repayment plan or when the son is unable to repay the loan on time, this can cause financial stress and family strife for the daughter.

2. Equality and fairness: When a mother favors a child, especially in economic matters, it can cause dissatisfaction and disagreement among the members of the family. Siblings will inevitably feel unfair and disappointed, especially if this favoritism is not in line with the consensus of the family or other family members have similar needs.

3. Independence and responsibility: Adult children should take responsibility for themselves and be financially independent. Borrowing money will weaken the son's opportunities for personal development and will not really develop his own sense of financial responsibility.

Every family and situation is different, and it is not an ideal choice for a mother to lend money from her daughter to her son to marry a wife. Before making a decision, it is important to fully assess family relationships and financial strength, taking into account the needs and interests of all members of the family group.