They won't get any help from me unless they're married...

[Crispypen]

DS is looking to buy a house with his GF.

My Dad has always had loose plans that he'd help DGC with their first homes, although GC don't know this and certainly aren't expecting it.

Dad has a very fixed idea that they shouldn't buy together unless married, so therefore won't be helping, which is his choice, but I can't get to the bottom of why.

I think if they can do it without help, that might actually be better anyway, as there's a lot of satisfaction in knowing you've worked for what you've got, but leaving that aside, what might Dad's thinking be?

He's not religious, I don't think this is anything to do with moral policing, more the security aspect, but to my mind it's easier to protect DS's half if they're not married, if that's the concern?

If his concerns are from the security aspect, does he understand that any money he gives to DS can be legally protected?

security aspect, maybe he thinks if they spilt up DS would loose the money. Obviously your dad is a little behind with the times!

He's old-fashioned and doesn't understand that monies put into an investment can be ring fenced in the event of a separation. Have you spoken to him about how his GC's money can be protected?

My parents were the same and if I’m honest i would have similar “rules” when it comes to my own children

Surely if they were married she'd get half but if they werent, he could walk away with everything that was his?

I bought a house with my bf in 1995 or thereabouts. My dad, a lawyer, was a bit traditional but he’d given me a deposit without strings. He did suggest that we had an agreement drawn up to protect the deposit. We did, it didn’t cost much. BF is now DH, but I’d encourage anyone in a similar position to have an agreement drawn up.

You can protect your deposit so I don't see a problem.

My guess is it’s to do with demonstrating how committed to the relationship they are. Couples splitting up is much more common now. Put a property in the mix, and splitting up becomes messier.

I think it's something along the lines of if they're not committed enough to each other to marry they shouldn't be buying a house together.

This is surely the wrong way round. The money can be better protected if they're NOT married can't it? Once they get married it becomes matrimonial assets.

Maybe it's not about ring-fencing the money but his sense of their true commitment to each other. Perhaps he thinks they should show commitment to each other through marriage before buying a home together. I may be very old-fashioned but I sort of agree, although I know people in totally committed LTRs with children and mortgages who never bothered to marry first. But I always wonder why not.

Ok, so as I said, old fashioned.

A lot of couples don’t marry. Are they religious? Is you dad religious? personally buying a house together is a pretty big commitment.

Ask him?

Morality.
Stability and commitment.
These are the things that spring to my mind.
Your dad probably thinks a fair weather gust could result in them separating. And it’s very easy to separate if you’re unmarried.

I suspect the DGF in question is a similar age to my parents (70s/80s). He may be considered old fashioned, but he will have been a young adult at a time when women couldn’t get a mortgage, and would have been expected to give up work on marriage, or once she had a child . Being married to own a house is his normal. He sees it as commitment.

I see his point.

It's old fashioned but he thinks they aren't in a committed relationship.

Sounds like he thinks the relationship is not fully committed, and obviously a breakup is messier with a jointly owned property.

How long have DS and GF been together, and how old are they? If they're 35, together 10 years, and trying for a baby, he's being ridiculous but obviously it's his call. But if they're 25 and together 2 years, I'm team grandad.

This is what I was goign to say. I know lots of people who feel this way. at a practical level, I disagree as with the cost of housing, the only way to get on the ladder is to have at least two people involved in the purchase quite often, but I get it at an emotional level.

haven't you answered your own question from your Dad's pov though @Crispypen

"but to my mind it's easier to protect DS's half"

Doesn't his grandad want your son to benefit from the whole of any gift he gives?

He possibly thinks that his grandson will have to "share" with someone who, in your Dad's eyes, are not "his family"

That kind of is a moral judgement I'd say. I can see you are looking for a rational explanation but I think for many of us these types of beliefs are more just about having a strong idea of "how it should be done" than anything more tangible.

You don’t say how old your DS is or how long he’s been with his GF.

But in this economy it’s often a choice of paying for a house or paying for a wedding and for my generation a lot of us choose house before wedding. Buying a house together is the commitment.

I’ve been married a LONG time and have DC and my parents (not that I want or have asked them to) have discounted transferring their property to me and “you never know if you’ll get divorced”. So they don’t want the value of what they’ve paid for being in the divorce pot.

I do understand it, they both come from poor families and have worked hard for what they’ve paid have and don’t want it going to another family. Even though they live my DH to bits.

Its very easy for young people to sort of fall into living together out of convenience without much thought for the long term, then spend a few years before getting out. Could he be coming from this angle? i. e. wants young relative to really think is this their life partner or just their ok for now partner.