Think twice before accepting gifts from your partner: He demanded the money back after the breakup and initiated enforcement proceedings

G.T., who works in e-commerce in Ankara, and M.S., who lives in Kayseri, met online last December and became a couple. During their relationship, M.S. sent G.T. food and drinks, as well as expensive gifts such as a mobile phone, watch, epilation device, and glasses, and also sent money to her bank account. G.T. broke up with M.S. 3 months later. M.S. sent a payment order to his ex-girlfriend, who rejected his reconciliation offer, through the Kayseri Enforcement Office, demanding the repayment of 130,000 lira, the total cost of the gifts. Because G.T. had moved, she did not receive the payment order and could not object; as a result of the enforcement proceedings, 140,000 lira, including legal fees, was seized from her account through a bank lien and paid to M.S.

G.T. applied to the Kayseri Duty Civil Court through her lawyer for the return of the money, claiming that the enforcement proceedings were unjust. In the application, the lawyer stated that M.S. had sent gifts as surprises throughout the relationship without any request from the client, that they were in no way given as a loan, and that a lawsuit had to be filed because she could not object to the payment order sent by the enforcement office in time due to reasons beyond her control. The application also emphasized that it is established by all Supreme Court rulings that gifts exchanged between lovers are considered donations. During this process, G.T. also applied to the family court and obtained a 3-month restraining order against M.S., whom she alleged had followed her from Kayseri to Ankara to the apartment complex where she lives and had been harassing her.

'NONE OF THE GIFTS WERE AT MY REQUEST'

M.S., on the other hand, filed a criminal complaint with the prosecutor's office against G.T., claiming that she had defrauded him with the promise of marriage. In the criminal complaint petition, M.S. stated that G.T. had promised marriage, expressed that she was in love at every opportunity, and renewed his trust, and that he was influenced by this. In the petition submitted through his lawyer, M.S. also made allegations of insult, threat, slander, and prostitution against G.T.

G.T. claimed that she had a long-distance relationship with M.S. and that they had met 2-3 times in 3 months, saying, "He was very attentive, thoughtful, and had reassuring behaviors. That's why I had good intentions toward him. During this process, he bought me gifts such as a watch, phone, white goods, small home appliances, glasses, and clothes. None of these were gifts at my request. I would suddenly see a package arrive at my home.

'WHEN HE COULDN'T REACH ME, HE WOULD SEND MONEY AND WRITE A MESSAGE IN THE DESCRIPTION SECTION'

Suddenly, a message would come saying, 'I bought this for you.' The money he sent to my account was also not at my request. He chose to do it this way. Later, when we broke up, he asked for it back. I agreed to give it back. I prepared everything. Later, he didn't want to take it. He continued to say things like, 'I didn't do it for the gifts. I'm doing it to reconcile with you. I'm doing it to be in contact with you. I don't care about the gifts.' Even though he was blocked everywhere, he started reaching out via email. If he couldn't reach me by email, he would send money to my account and leave messages in the description sections," she said.

G.T. alleged that M.S. was stalking her and had moved to Ankara and rented an apartment in the same complex where she lived, stating, "He sent me the rental contract via email. I was constantly receiving emails saying, 'I moved, I came for you.' He was sending threatening messages. I obtained a restraining order; he violated it 3 times. He is making ugly accusations and ugly slanders. He tells the story of how we met very differently, portrays it very differently, and shares private conversations that could happen between any couple with my close circle. This process has worn me out psychologically," she expressed.

'WE WILL CONTINUE OUR STRUGGLE BEFORE THE LAW'

G.T.'s lawyer, Betül Yüksel, said, "There is an unjust enforcement proceeding initiated regarding gifts received during the relationship. In Turkish law, the concept of engagement and the return of engagement gifts is a matter covered by civil law. Here, however, there is an unjust enforcement proceeding filed for the return of gifts received involuntarily during a short relationship period. By exploiting legal loopholes, through an enforcement proceeding without a court ruling, and because the notification of this proceeding was made improperly, all of my client's savings, which would affect her life, are being taken away through a bank lien.

A policy of intimidation is being pursued with an enforcement proceeding aimed at victimizing my client, making her lose her will to live, and scaring her. Furthermore, they are trying to weaken her by slandering, smearing, and discrediting her. He is filing criminal complaints with unjust slanders. He says, 'She took gifts from me, she defrauded me.' He is trying to discredit her life by saying about their relationship, 'She engaged in prostitution with me for money.' The individual in question continues his persistent stalking and harassment. After the discrediting campaign, my client is also worried about her safety. We have obtained protection orders, but we are experiencing difficulties in terms of the enforceability of these protection orders. We will continue our struggle before the law," she said.

News Source: 12punto