Not to want to help fund MIL's/family holiday home?

[RightBuggerforit]

MIL bought a holiday home with inheritance from FIL 20 years ago. It has been used as a family holiday place in the past for dh and 2 SILs but they're all grown up now. MIL uses it loads, several times a year for weeks at a time (alongside several other foreign holidays a year), SILs also go there once or twice a year. Dh and I don't use it, we have a young family and can't afford a holiday, plus it takes ages and costs a lot to get there, hours on ferry and car etc and isn't near anything, so even if we could afford a holiday, we would have it somewhere else.

MIL now says she is having trouble affording the upkeep of the property, which she and the SILs are attached to due emotionally to it being purchased in memory of FIL, so selling is not an option. Dh doesn't see any connection.

As a solution, MIL has suggested that, since this house will be left to the 3 kids, they should all start contributing for it now, about £300 a year. I think this is unreasonable, if you use a holiday home and you want to keep it, shouldn't you pay for it yourself instead of asking your dc to pay? MIL has no mortgage and is in the process of downsizing which will free up nearly £100,000 of capital to help with her lifestyle, so why not use some of this money?

I feel really strongly that if we can't afford a family holiday of our own, we shouldn't be funding a share of MIL's holidays, especially given she's in a much better position than we are financially. Dh says we should see it as an investment because we will inherit a third of this house at some point, and if we don't pay MIL has said she will cut him off from this part of the will.

AIBU/WWYD?

has anyone suggested letting it out? that way its kept in the family but would earn some money. if all the children do inherit the property what will happen - will the daughters still want to hang onto it and you not visit? In which case you will just have a property you own a third of and pay a third of the costs, but never use

They are all using it, they should pay for the costs between them. If MIL and both SIL pay £100 more a year each then you don't need to pay and they aren't paying a lot to have holidays there (as you would have to).

I think your DH needs to make them all understand that while you might all benefit out of the asset one day they are all benefitting out of now, where you guys can't... so they need to be paying for it.

If you cant afford this then TBH I wouldnt get involved. You could easily find that there is no inheritance in the future anyway (care home expenditure) and that this is simply money down the drain.

If SiLs are also of the emotional attachment thought then chances are they wont want to sell and will continue to expect you to cough up you £300+.

Ugh, family and money...

Whatever you decide is for the best, make sure it is written down - crystal clear in more detail than you think you need, so they everyone knows the situation. I'd be inclined to agree with you in not keeping it. Maybe be totally honest and say you just can't afford it (and just a little bit not-so-honest...that you'd really love to help!).

lost of x-posting, I type too slowly!

What happens if it has to be sold to fund care? Or if the sil don't want to sell it.

As you are not using it it seems you would just be subsidising others holidays. If you are not in a financial position to have your own holidays then I imagine it could cause massive resentment.

What would mil say if you explain you just can't afford to?

God, what a weird suggestion if you don't use it!

I would say no and fine, I don't expect to inherit anything from the holiday home, like someone said above it might have to be sold for care at some point anyway, you can't be sure they ever will have a lump sum in inheritence from it

Although I agree with the suggestion of letting it out - if they let it for the weeks they don't use it that could bring in the extra money they need to keep it up

Yes she knows we can't afford a holiday, we haven't been for years.

I am not convinced by the investment argument, this is where dh and I disagree - and we very rarely argue. To me, and it's an awful thing to weigh up, but MIL is young. Hopefully she has a good 30 years or more yet. But anything could happen in this time - she may need to free up more capital to fund the travelling etc, or in future she may need residential care, for example, so there's no guarantee of anything. Also if we do inherit a third, and then SILs don't want to sell, they may not be able to buy us out, and we would be unable to (and just wouldn't!) force a sale, so although a third might be worth, for example £40-50k in theory (which is how dh sees it), in practice I suspect it could just be something we never stop paying for and never see any return at all.

I don't think it would rent out commercially at all either, given it's location and that it's not in the best state of repair (although dh has done a lot of work on it in the past to make improvements).

i agree with catsareevil i think it does sound like a good investment and papers should be drawn up and give everyone a fair and equal allocation time.....during your allocation time you could always rent the accomodation out

Sorry - x-posts with loads of people there! x

if you rented it out during your allocated time it could generate paying for itself, just a thought

Could your DP offer to do some work on the property instead of paying the £300 - if he's done improvements before could that be an option?

If it is a rent to own situation, make it that, in writing. And, have a written agreement with SILs that it will be sold on MILs death. They will probably refuse and DH will see the light. I agree that there is nothing to stop MIL selling for care costs, disinheriting you anyway or something else.

Which is another point - if you are paying an annual sum so you morally if not legally part 'own' it / responsible for it, and some major repairs (like roof replacement) come up are you going to get strong armed into contributing to that. Without formal papers to define the arrangement there are no boundaries or guarantees of anything so you are wide open to just see all the money disappear with no idea what, if anything, or when you get it back. That is not a good investment. Even with formal papers to keep it open and above board it is a shaky idea.

i think, nicely, tell her that you are in no position to commit to that arrangement and you understand that may mean she alters her intentions for the property - you are sorry not to be able to join in but such is how it is.

I'd like to sound a warning note about property in France - unfortunately you can't bequeath it to anyone you want. France has historic property laws and all children get an equal share - your MIL can't just cut you out. I'd be seeking legal advice on this as I suspect under French law, you already (or your DH does) own part of the property and are liable for taxes as it is.

Following your latest post it doesn't sound like a good investment at all.

See here for more info.

What happens if dh and mil have a disagreement in the future? Will you be disinherited then too?

Or if she remarries?

Or wants to sell to free up cash?

I think it's asking for trouble tbh. 300 quid per annum isn't a great deal but it is if you can't even afford a family holiday.

"Dh says we should see it as an investment because we will inherit a third of this house at some point, and if we don't pay MIL has said she will cut him off from this part of the will." only pay if she signs it over to you now?

Unless it gets sold to pay for her care!

Surely you should only pay if she signs it over to you now?

Even with that you´ve got three people with joint ownership.

How do you divide the upkeep?

Equally?

Those who use it more?

What if one party wants to sell?

Or someone wants to rent it out & others don´t?

Seems to me the SILs view the property differently & OPs husband would probably get "outvoted" on anything!

Carpejuggulum - Thanks, I had thought that was the case! What I assume would happen instead is that MIL will assess what she thinks the property is worth (probably an entirey unrealistic figure). She will then have to leave the holiday property to all 3 dcs - with all the financial ties and responsibilities to it, and cut dh out of any actual money or inheritance from the house here. Maybe this is why dh thinks it's a good investment, just for this not to happen!

You mention several "other foreign holidays" - by this can we assume that the property is abroad? Which country? This might make a huge difference - e.g. if in France a) there are strict laws about inheritance to children (probably the same for other civil law / Napoleonic law countries, whereby the parent does not have a choice of the property not going to the children, and b) the government has just brought in new capital gains tax raising the time you have to own the property up to 30 years before being exempt capital gains, so that would have an impact on both the value and the need to sell to cover tax liabilities.

Going on your latest post and Carpe's French property info, I would definitely walk away from this.

If your DH thinks it would be a good investment of your family money, then he needs to prove this to you - with hard cold facts and figures. In the same way you would have to should a similar 'opportunity' arise with your relations/friends.

If he's happy to front up £300 p.a. that you can't afford, why not put it into ISA's or a high interest savings account, or bond?

A 'good' investment in property is only one that makes you money or will provide you with collateral for a loan. It doesn't sound as though this holiday home would do either.

Also, there are lots of good ideas here if we do have to do it, like signing it over beforehand, tying everything up in writing etc. But, I don't think dh would be able to bring himself to ask that (I once asked him once to ask MIL to cook us something, cant remember why - maybe just after dd was born, and he could hardly bring himself to, he's a real pushover when it comes to his mum). Anyway, MIL has asked specifically for a 'family meeting' about it - dc partners not welcome! This is another thing dh and I disagree about. I think that's really disrespectful, because it's not just his money, it's our family money. The SILs are not married, no kids and one still lives at home, so they're not in the same position. Not that I want to be part of that akward conversation, but it would be better than not being part of it, iykwim!

I can see dh agreeing to something there and us having a massive barney about it afterwards, and then I'll have to go and see MIL myself (we normally get on well, but that would be one akward thing to get past!), or send him back to sort it out, or suck it up and cancel whatever we've got left to cancel - reduce the repayment on the credit card or something I suppose. Ugh. :/

a 'family' meeting?! You are family! And presumably make decisions together (financial and otherwise). He should insist that you are present.