MIL wanting a Golddigger Contract signed(357 Posts)
So DH and I are in the position where we will need to move house soon. DH's parents have long said that when we want to get on the property ladder they'll kindly gift us a deposit.
We've wanted to buy for a while, and even looked at houses and got mortgage advice many years ago but when we told PIL that we were ready to buy they wanted change our wills etc. We were OK to do so but somehow talks never really progressed and DC came along and we forgot about buying for a while.
Fast forward to now: DH asked MIL if she could give us some of the money she had saved up for him for a deposit. She replied that DH should consider two options: firstly PIL could offer a 0% loan to DH alone to "protect the money" or DH might want to consider a Deed of Trust on the house we get, she then went on to outline a several cases in which marriages had broken down and one partner had been left with nothing. MIL also said that DH didn't have to take either of these options the deposit could just be a gift If he decided but he should have a think about it.
I'm grateful for being given the opportunity to get on the property ladder, as it's so hard to save a deposit these days but AIBU to be upset at MIL mentioning divorce to DH, talking about the possibility of me "leaving him with nothing" and offering to give DH a loan to "protect the money" from me.
On one level I'm thinking she worked long and hard for the money and wants it to just go to her child, but on another it really upsets me as it feels like she's not really supporting the marriage and her request to think about divorce issues is undermining the sanctity of my marriage vows: we said "all that I have I share with you" and promised to be together for life!
I've given up work to look after our children and never thought about the personal money and earning potential I'm forfeiting. Plus I was with DH for years and was our only breadwinner for several periods during our relationship before kids. I've never been in it for money.
Personally I don't think anyone should mention the 'D' word to a happy couple - it seems like bad juju! And parents shouldn't collude to "protect" money from one spouse it changes the dynamic and the power balance of the marriage. Is it just me? Or am I wrong to feel a bit miffed?
Well, is it her decision ultimately? What does your DH think about it all? That's the important thing.
Crass and rude of her to talk like this. What did your dh say?
Look sorry but the user names thing freaks me out and now another user has replied. It's too confusing. Pick a better name
She is not 'undermining the sanctity of your marriage vows' YABweird.
It's their money, they can do with as they want. It is totally, totally reasonable to future proof investments. You will of course have future proofed your own investments, when you wrote your will? Offering option a, but in the event of predeceased, relationship breakdown option b, and option c, etc etc. That's just prudence.
You never thought about your own financial future and sacrifices, yeah that's your look out. You absolutely should have (still should) maybe then you'd understand where your PILs were coming from. A marriage certificate isn't a substitute for a solid financial future.
Personally I think she is appalling. Especially since you have been he sole breadwinner in the past and now stay at home with the children therefore forfeiting your own personal earning power. I am gobsmacked that in these circumstances she would undermine your relationship like that. She is effectively encouraging your DH to put himself first and planting the seed in his mind that one day you and he will get divorced. Who the hell is she to disrespect you, your children and your relationship in this way?
I would be furious and I would rather rent forever than have my marital home in my husband only' name (is that even possible?) Tell your DH if he wants to consider this then he will have to start paying for childcare as he is effectively forcing you to be financially independent of each other so you will have to go back to work.
If they do go ahead with this arrangement will you be paying towards the mortgage?
Badly phrased but it's fair enough that mil doesn't want the capital she has lent for the house to become a marital asset in the unfortunate situation that you split up.
If you don't it's a non problem.
Absolutely fair. MIL is not suggesting you WILL get divorced, just in case of. Try not to be offended, they're just doing what they see is right for their son.
She is being silly. She worked hard and made money for herself. You were the sole breadwinner for a long period and her son is only now able to earn money for himself because you have sacrificed/put on hold your own career. If you hadn't, he'd have to be at home or restricting his own earning potential. To suggest this money needs to be "protected" from you in the future, when you will have less money personally because of the set up you've got with your own family (you, her son and your children) is ridiculous.
Wtf januarie?! MIL is very kindly offering them money and you think how dare she? and who mentioned the house being in the dh's name only?
FWIW I think MIL is being very sensible and protecting her gift. She wants it used sensibly. Shame OP isn't thinking sensibly about all possible futures.
If op is sahm to the children she is paying towards the mortgage with the provision of her labour, which is facilitating her dh's earning power. If the mil wants to buy her son a family home then it will belong to his family, which includes op. If she wants to give him some money just for him, she should either do that, or buy him something only he can use, like a diamond encrusted fleshlight.
we said "all that I have I share with you" and promised to be together for life!
Be realistic - everyone says ^. Still almost half end in divorce.
No, she is giving her the money. All DH needs to say is that he'd like it as a gift and then they can have it and use it in joint names or whatever. Fine.
Marriages end in divorce, and if they don't they end in death, you have to consider both of those options when making investments! You promised to be together for life but how many divorced people do you know? They all promised the same.it happens, and sometimes it's the best move for the family and the individuals concerned.
More to the point, why are you not cross at DH for not just saying, yeah it's fine we'd prefer it gifted with no strings because we promised to be together forever?
I think it's sensible - imagine how horrible it would be for them if the worst did happen and their hard-earned cash was gone.
It is however a different matter if you are paying into the mortgage - but she seems to have worded it sensibly and therefore there should be an easy solution following a grown-up conversation.
Me and DFiance have Deed of Declarion of Trust. He put in twice what I did and his money came from MIL. The agreement is that in the event of a split he gets his deposit back, I get mine back and any profit is split 50/50. Equally If we sell at a loss, we take back our deposits less a 50/50 split of the loss. I think that's entirely fair.
People all have different priorities. PIL protected their gift of a house deposit to DH and I until DS came along. Then they said his and future siblings right to stay in their home with the main carer (in the event of divorce) was more important than anyone's claim to any money, so they tore the agreement up (well, had it legally voided by a solicitor etc). Thing is, once you've borne their grandkids, you're always family. Well, you'd hope anyway.
I was never all that bothered about PIL protecting their contribution because although a generous sum, it was only about 5% of the value of the house. So wouldn't be a significant portion of the equity after a few years anyway. And if we were only married a few years of course they should get it back. However, if the sum is more like 50% and demanding it back would leave you homeless that's a different kettle of fish.
What does your DH think?
YABU, DH and I considered divorce (and death, and critical illness/disability etc) when buying together, it's entirely sensible. DH and I are 100% committed but you are an idiot if you are blinkered to all potential outcomes when you make a big financial commitment.
Her suggestions are worth at least talking about.
Diane you can set the option to highlight the OP's posts meaning you can scroll through hundreds of posts to find the original poster, it also lets you choose your own highlight colour for your posts.
So in this case I see the OP's opening post as green, my posts are a pinky colour.
It's is your Mumsnet settings.
OP - I would take legal advice to see what a solicitor advises you and Dh in this situation.
I think your MiL is being very sensible and pragmatic. I don´t see the problem at all.
I think she is out of order. Our family home is exactly that. I would not put myself in a situation where I lived in my home but my DH owned it.
I don't get how the DH could be 'left with nothing' surely the norm is for marital assets to be split equally, partly to protect the children who are MIL's GC !
I can see this from both points of view. Yes, it can feel hurtful if you feel that your DH (or his parents) feel they have to protect his money from you. But if you're in a happy marriage and don't ever split, it won't make any difference to you.
I've been in this situation with DH. We had a large deposit when we bought a house together which was my money. Yes, he was slightly miffed when I took action to protect it, but I considered it like this: if he stayed with me, he had nothing to lose and the agreement was irrelevant to him. If he loved me for me, then surely he would want me to have what was rightfully mine. It would only be a problem if he could imagine a future where we split up and he wanted to take more away than he had contributed -in which case I would have been well within my rights to have protected it.
With my ex, our deposit came as a gift from his parents - we had our shares set out accordingly and were tenants in common. When we split, he bought me out according to those shares. When DH and I bought our house together, I insisted on us being joint tenants (and so equal shares) even though he had much more of a deposit because I was pregnant with our first, we weren't married at the time and I felt I needed some sort of protection. In both cases we both paid half of the mortgage. I think it's a bit odd to go for unequal shares if you are already married and you have financially disadvantaged yourself to look after your children.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.