Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To not want to spend the money this way?

402 replies

moneydilemma · 30/03/2011 11:00

(regular user, have name changed for this- and am prepared for a flaming!)

Bit of background - DP & I have been together for 2.5 years & have a DD who is 3 months old. I bought my house 10 years ago & as I earn more than DP I pay the mortgage each month & he pays the council tax, utilities etc.

I am about to receive an inheritance that my grandfather left me in his will when he passed away last year. It's enough for me to be able to pay off the mortgage, and there will be some left over for us to get married (we've been engaged for a year) & to save. I thought it would be a good idea for us to put the savings in our DDs name for when she turns 18, to help with uni costs/travelling/buying house etc.

Now comes the issue! My DP has a son from a previous relationship who is 6. He hasn't seen him in 4 years for a lot of reasons, mainly that his ex keeps moving & changing her phone number, so he has no idea where she currently is, but he pays maintenance through the csa each month. When I mentioned my plan to save the money for our DD he said that we should do the same for his son. I don't know if I'm just being mean, but I'm not too happy with the idea of investing money given to me by my grandfather for his son. I think I would see it differently if he saw him regularly, but as there is no contact at all I can't really understand it.

I did suggest that once the mortgage was paid off I would be paying half the household bills so that would enable him to save a few hundred each month for his son if he wanted, but he thinks that he should have a lump sum too, otherwise our DD will have more money when she is 18 than his son will. (I did point out that his ex may well be saving for their son too)

So, AIBU?

OP posts:
plopplopquack · 30/03/2011 13:47

Not at all. Its just that it always seems to be where the man earns less that he has less consideration in taking more money...its his son. He should be the one making more effort.

What does that mean? Can't make sense of it.

MrSpoc · 30/03/2011 13:50

Nijinsky so by your very strange logic my wife should get fuck all because she does not earn a bean.

How very degrading of you to suggest that he is a lesser man because his wife earns more than you. I think you are living in the dark ages and a littlec sexist.

Have you ever tried to find someone who does not want to be found? This is a big world and if you did not want to be found then i am sure it wont be that hard to do.

mummytime · 30/03/2011 13:52

YANBU he is.
I have put money away for my kids to have when they are 18, they can be sensible or not, they won't get more if they fritter it away. I don't see the problem.

BTW its not fair on my 3 kids, as one got a government baby bond and the other two didn't. Also although they were all bought Child Bonds as babies, the amount they will be worth will differ as interest rates differ. I may or may not do something to even this out at 18, we'll have to see.

If you can afford to put the money aside for your DD then fine, I don't see why you should be obliged to do the same for a step child (especially who doesn't live with you), even more so when you don't know the child and neither did your grandfather.

Hullygully · 30/03/2011 13:54

I am, as ever, staggered by the greed, selfishness and downright unpleasantness of the majority.

I feel very sorry for your dp, and his child. And I feel even sorrier that you are hesitating to put something aside for his child to use at a future date. Something that DOES show that his father (and you) thought and cared about him enough to do.

plopplopquack · 30/03/2011 13:55

Oh that's what it means!!!!! You actually think as the lesser earner he should have not so much of a say!!! Fooking hell! So all the SAHMs get NO SAY AT ALL with that logic. Shocked. Shocked!

nijinsky · 30/03/2011 13:55

Mr Spoc How very degrading of you to suggest that he is a lesser man because his wife earns more than you. I think you are living in the dark ages and a littlec sexist. "

Actually it is you who is suggesting that, not me. Rather telling?

Plopplopquack I noted the man hater comments on here, and I don't think its man hating at all. I think its simply common sense to know that there are men out there who will milk you for what they can get.

I don't think the OP's husband sounds like this at all. But it does create a slightly bad impression to demand that his son, whom the OP has never met, benefits from her inheritance. After all, there is no getting round the fact that he will be in an advantageous position if she pays of the mortgage, and there seems no reason why he should not set up a savings account in his son's name, if that is what he wants.

I think its always wise to think a little about what might happen if things do go wrong in the relationship.

MrSpoc · 30/03/2011 13:58

As always Hullygully is talking sense.

fedupofnamechanging · 30/03/2011 13:59

Just a thought, but if your DP is paying child support, can his solicitor not find out from the CSA where the payments are going to?

I also think you should pay off the mortgage and keep the rest in trust, for your DD and any other children you have in the future. This may include your DP's son, if you want to do that down the line. I don't think you should decide that just yet.

I do agree that it is really the job of the mother and father to provide financially for the child, not the step parent, unless one of the bio parents is not on the scene and the step parent has parental responsibility or a very close relationship with the child.

OP - I like your compromise idea of getting DP to save himself for his son. That money will mean more to his child if it actually comes from his dad, rather than you. It takes no effort or thought to put aside your money, but it does take thought for your DP to save regularly for him.

MrSpoc · 30/03/2011 14:00

nijinsky - really i think you need to re-read what you wrote and if you did not mean that then you need to make clear what your point was.

Sweetpea215 · 30/03/2011 14:00

If it were me...I would ultimately have thought "what would my grandfather have wanted"

I think he would have wanted the money to have helped the OP and her daughter...and to have enhanced her security for the future.

She is NOT married (as I said before) and therefore the rights of being married don't apply.

Ultimately...it's her say...and how her DP reacts is very telling. She should pay careful attention!

nijinsky · 30/03/2011 14:01

"Nijinsky so by your very strange logic my wife should get fuck all because she does not earn a bean."

You know Mr Spoc, I find it rather incredulous that you are able to support a SAHM, with your inability to write legibly, and your quick to resort to saying whatever you think, no matter how disproportionate, to make your point.

Hullygully · 30/03/2011 14:01

And, remember the marriage vows?

With this Ring I thee wed, with my body I thee worship, and with all my worldly goods I thee endow

What? Unless the "worldly goods" come from sodding Granddad?

fedupofnamechanging · 30/03/2011 14:02

Just to add, I don't think he's a money grabber. If my DH inherited money, I would view it as ours, just the same as if I inherited it. I can understand a dad wanting to see both his DC treated equally, but I can also see that his son will inherit from his mother, so perhaps your money should go to your children.

ineedagoodsolicitor · 30/03/2011 14:02

OP I think that you have been fair in setting out that you intend to pay off the mortgage and then start contributing to the household bills leaving your dp extra funds each month to put away each month to build a nest egg for his ds. It is a credit to your dp though that he considers his children equally even though he is not involved in the life of his ds. It is a big ask though to consider your inheritance joint monies to do with as he sees fit regardless of your opinion. Surely what he craves is contact with his son and utilising some of the money on trying to re-establish that contact would be in everyone's interest in the long-term. If it is successful you may establish a step-mother role and feel that you too want to make a nest-egg available to him in due course.

Dp putting away seom of the extra money he will have each month would show his ds that he was thinking of him over a long period of time, not just a one-off thought when he once got his hands on some easy money.

Point out that your joint dd's nest egg will be sorted out so your dp doesn't have to put aside any money into that each month.

If the dss lived with you and therefore knew your grandfather etc etc, I might hesitate a bit but the dss has his own set of grandparents via which to come into a bit of money or not in the future, he also has his own mother to provide for him financially. What if your dp had three children from a previous relationship would he really be asking you to give 3/4 of the money to children you are simply not involved with in any way on a daily basis.

I would think seriously however about whether you and dp may have more children and consider not tying up dd's money exclusively for her but in a find to be split between all of your children ("your" here meaning you personally, not the combined children of you and your dp).

I speak as someone whose own grandparents favoured one grandchild (who lived locally to them) over the others when it came to inheriting on their death. This encouraged the grandhchild who also then started visiting a couple of great aunts and BINGO inherited a couple of valuable antiques from one of them too in due course. The grandchild in question now has a family reputation a as a "coffin-chaser" !

Hullygully · 30/03/2011 14:03

And the op has already said Granddad couldn't give a toss what she does with the money. The convenience and venality of pretending it's all about "what granddad wanted."

Maybe he wanted her to have a happy marriage and to show a bit of love and charity rather than acting selfishly for half her family.

MrSpoc · 30/03/2011 14:04

Thanks thats great nijinsky i also own my own succesful business and earn a hell of a lot. you may of noticed my miss typing this is more because i cannot be arsed checking my spelling and is a mistake but thank you for picking it up I am sure it makes you feel better since you have not had a valid point to make.

expatinscotland · 30/03/2011 14:05

'He is your DH's DS and your DSS.'

They're not married. He is not her DSS in the eyes of the law. Legally, people who are not married do not have the same financial rights, in many ways, as married people unless they have seen a solicitor and legally planned otherwise.

So, technically, she could set up an account for his son and, if they split up, the money's gone.

So get married first, OP, then plan.

Laquitar · 30/03/2011 14:06

The way i see it your child has only one mum and dad. One grandfather and one inheritance. Your stepson has another home aswell, a mum, maybe a stepdad maybe a granddad with money. He should be 'important' in that home too.

I dont think you should split the money equally between the two children. On emotional level yes he should be made feel important and welcome to your home.

You said you are earning more plus you had your own house. Is this because he lacks skills/qualifications/had bad luck or because you are more sensible and work harder?

plopplopquack · 30/03/2011 14:06

You know Mr Spoc, I find it rather incredulous that you are able to support a SAHM, with your inability to write legibly

Personal insults aren't really necessary are they! It just makes you look nasty.

You were the one who said the man has less consideration about the money if he earns less (if this isn't what you meant then you need to make yourself clear, and really it makes you a bit hypocritical to talk about writing legibly)

ineedagoodsolicitor · 30/03/2011 14:06

Hully-gully,

Marriage vows come from another century and did not take into account today's families having been extended by fracture and reforing with step parents. Long ago, step-parents were acquired when your bereaved parent remarried.

I don't think illegitimate children were even formally acknowledged in wills.

OP mentions her dp not dh, they haven't made any marriage vows yet.

nijinsky · 30/03/2011 14:06

Mr Spoc I just don't believe what you say is entirely true. You don't come across as credible. And don't try your manipulative bully-boy tactics on me. It won't work.

Hullygully · 30/03/2011 14:06

They are about to get married. Better change their vows, huh?

So, technically, she could set up an account for his son and, if they split up, the money's gone.

So what? The money is for him. Full stop. No one else can take it if it's in trust for him.

expatinscotland · 30/03/2011 14:07

And you can choose all sorts of vows.

Ours never mentioned worldly goods.

happyinherts · 30/03/2011 14:07

This child has his own grandparents, parents and family.

The OP is not acting selfishly for half her family at all. Her DP note not DH is being insensitive and greedy

plopplopquack · 30/03/2011 14:07

Sorry MrSpoc got to pop out and leave you with the madness that is "the man haters of MN".