AIBU to feel upset about my well-off in-laws being tight with money at Christmas?

Yes that’s tight. I’ve often found that retirees who are well off think the younger generation need to go through the pain like they did when they were young parents and struggling. They’ll say nobody helped them, either. That, couple with knowing there’s no further income for them, just spending from now on, means they budget and stress, often needlessly. I don’t understand it. What’s the point of money if not this, once your future is secure?

Welcome to the world of stingy grandparents.
DH’s parents spend less than your in-laws and they only have two grandchildren. DD and DS realized at some point that they’re more stingy than most of their friends’ GP’s, but that’s who they are, I suppose. I don’t really understand it tbh, I enjoy spoiling others when I can.

I don't think you should be telling individual people who lived it how easy they had it.

Isn't that the famous gaslighting that people are always banging on about on MN?

I’m feeling a bit sad and annoyed and just want to sanity-check whether I’m being unreasonable.

My in-laws are very comfortable financially - retired, mortgage paid off, big house, multiple holidays a year, no real financial worries. We, on the other hand, are on a low income and things are tough at the moment. They know all of this.

Back in the summer, they offered (we didn’t ask) to put £100 towards a new bike for our son. It was kind of framed as a nice gesture at the time. Then they later told us that because they’d contributed to the bike, they would only get him “something small” for his birthday, as the bike was his birthday present from them. Fine, I understood that.

Fast forward to the other day: we were at theirs and they asked what we all might like for Christmas. I said I wasn’t sure yet what our son would like, and I’d let them know. My MIL immediately said, “Oh don’t forget we bought that bike for him — that was birthday and Christmas, so we’ll just get him a book or something small.”

I just sat there feeling a bit stunned and honestly hurt. It’s not about wanting them to shower him with expensive gifts - it’s more that the £100 they offered months ago is now being used as a reason to opt out of both birthday and Christmas. Meanwhile they are extremely comfortable and spend freely on themselves in other areas.

They also very rarely help with anything practical or day-to-day with him, so it’s not like they’re involved in other ways.

I can’t quite put my finger on it, but something about it feels… mean? And I hate that feeling, because I don’t want to care about money like that. But I’m struggling with the idea that their grandson is basically getting a token gift at Christmas because of something they voluntarily contributed to back in July.

AIBU to feel upset and a bit angry about this? Or am I overthinking it?

I think you’ve misunderstood OP’s upset.

It’s not about the price of the gift.

Of course OP would have been happy with the gifts you described.

But that’s not what happened.

The grandparents asked to contribute to a bike.

They then seemed to have regretted that moment of generosity and decided to rescind it by using it as collateral against a birthday gift. They then further compounded their meanness of character by using it as collateral against a Christmas present too.

It is repulsive behaviour. Better had they just kept quiet rather than prove how disordered their thinking is.

I’m feeling a bit sad and annoyed and just want to sanity-check whether I’m being unreasonable.

My in-laws are very comfortable financially - retired, mortgage paid off, big house, multiple holidays a year, no real financial worries. We, on the other hand, are on a low income and things are tough at the moment. They know all of this.

Back in the summer, they offered (we didn’t ask) to put £100 towards a new bike for our son. It was kind of framed as a nice gesture at the time. Then they later told us that because they’d contributed to the bike, they would only get him “something small” for his birthday, as the bike was his birthday present from them. Fine, I understood that.

Fast forward to the other day: we were at theirs and they asked what we all might like for Christmas. I said I wasn’t sure yet what our son would like, and I’d let them know. My MIL immediately said, “Oh don’t forget we bought that bike for him — that was birthday and Christmas, so we’ll just get him a book or something small.”

I just sat there feeling a bit stunned and honestly hurt. It’s not about wanting them to shower him with expensive gifts - it’s more that the £100 they offered months ago is now being used as a reason to opt out of both birthday and Christmas. Meanwhile they are extremely comfortable and spend freely on themselves in other areas.

They also very rarely help with anything practical or day-to-day with him, so it’s not like they’re involved in other ways.

I can’t quite put my finger on it, but something about it feels… mean? And I hate that feeling, because I don’t want to care about money like that. But I’m struggling with the idea that their grandson is basically getting a token gift at Christmas because of something they voluntarily contributed to back in July.

AIBU to feel upset and a bit angry about this? Or am I overthinking it?

You did have help, life was much easier for you. It was easier to live. Now it is almost impossible ! So yes you did have more help.

We’re comfortably off retirees.
And nobody did help us. They didn’t have the money.

I don’t want my dc to struggle. We’ve helped both with weddings, houses, renovations etc.
And they all get a budget of £70 for Christmas to choose a gift and we spend another £30 on extras.

This poster's lengthy (and often derailing) contributions on other threads often berate posters for being unkind and unchristian. As she is a practising Christian, I'm appalled that she wishes to remove Child Benefit from even the very poorest children.

They sound mean, petty and selfish. I don’t understand that sort of pettiness. I wonder what your DH thinks? I’d be embarrassed if my parents were like that.

What the fuck? "Secretly decide to deduct it" from what, exactly? The grandparents aren't obliged to spend quid one on the grandkids, let alone explain their math to anyone outside the two of them. Now you are accusing them of "secrecy" because they had a household chat and decided they needed to even things out among the grandkids?

And in what way are they clawing back anything? Only a greedy, entitled, grabby person would see it that way. Talk about delusional.

Did they say "We will pay £100 toward the bike AND of course you can "expect" that we also will spend at least £50 on Oliver at Christmas, no worries!" Doesn't sound like it, from anything the OP has posted. and even if they had, newsflash: they are allowed to change their minds midstream about their gift-giving budget.

In what world is it OK for the OP or anyone else to EXPECT anything from the grandparents? a £5 book is a generous gift. If they feel like offering more, fine, but if they don't, it's really not on to accuse them of some nefarious plot to deprive OP's child of additional largess.

Oliver got a bike this year. Maybe Bronwyn and Evvie and Sam got a small present for their birthdays and will receive larger presents at Christmas. Or maybe not. It's entirely the giver's prerogative. If they want to take a cruise instead of giving any kid more than a postcard and a bar of chocolate, that's their choice, too.

Those of you who somehow think your elders owe you as adults are really out of line. If you chose to have kids, it's up to YOU to provide for them. Get a second job if necessary.

This is the upshot of it, yes.

So they, completely unprompted, OFFER to pay £100 towards a birthday gift, then decide between them to secretly deduct it from the boys Christmas presents.

I'm glad you've got a handle on what has actually happened and what OP is upset about, the fact that you think it is okay for the child to now be penalised because of their godawful decision making and communication is quite worrying though.

You shouldn't offer to "pay for a gift" if you then need to claw back that money off the receiver in other ways further down the line.. because then it wasn't a "gift" at all, it was a LOAN and should have been communicated as such at the time (which, ironically, I'm sure would have been fine if they'd have just said that!), bonkers behaviour from the grandparents, and I'm completely with OP as to why she is annoyed, in her shoes I would have refused the "gift" if I knew they were just going to deduct the cost of it further down the line.

GIFT
a thing given willingly to someone without payment; a present.

There are no strings whatsoever attached to the bike gift. The OP isn't required to do anything in return.

People don't necessarily plot every conversation out to the nth degree. A spontaneous conversation is not a binding contract.
"We're thinking of getting a bike for Oliver's birthday this summer."
"Oh, great! Which one? Oh, that's expensive. We could contribute 100 quid."
"Oh, thank you, that will help make it possible."

Later at home, GPs talk: "We can't really afford 100 for each grandchild, now that I think about it. How's that going to work?"
"Hmm, you're right. But we already committed the £100. I guess this can be Oliver's big gift from us for birthday AND Christmas. We'll get him a book or something so he has a present to open. And that way we'll be sticking to the £100 per grandchild annual limit."

They do not owe OP an explanation of how they budget.

I accept graciously and don't impugn the givers' character behind their back, or begrudge them their holidays and personal spending.

This notion that the grandparents are "moving the goalposts" or "disappointing the OP's expecations" because they offered to help with the bike and then, when reviewing their annual spending on ALL the grandchildren, evened it up - is absurd. They didn't owe OP an explanation of their annual budget at the time they offered to assist with the bike. Why were they even drawn into that conversation in the first place? "Thanks, mum, but we've got it covered," on the OP's part would have saved everyone a lot of aggravation.

This expectation that grandparents who have worked all of their lives are supposed to set aside their own hopes for the last decade or two of their lives and instead be generous benefactors to the younger generation who have barely put any time into the workforce is insane.