AIBU to not want my ILs to control our finances?

[SweetChilliSauce]

This is my first ever post so please bear with me if you can ? apologies for the length but I?m trying to avoid drip feeding.

DP?s parents own two houses. The house they live in (DP?s childhood home) and the house that belonged to DP?s grandmother, which they inherited when she sadly passed away a number of years ago. DP?s grandmother?s house has been in their family for around 100 years so it is owned outright ? no mortgage. The house had been empty since she died.

When DP and I found out we were expecting DS, his parents were incredibly generous and offered us the opportunity to move in to the empty house and live there for 5 years, rent free. This was, they said, to give us a chance to save for a mortgage, and not be under financial pressure to have both of us working full time whilst DS was little. We knew that this was an amazing opportunity and very kind of them, and we gratefully accepted. We have been here for nearly two years now.

The house was in need of a substantial amount of work, but we were more than happy to put in the time and the money to make a home for ourselves and give ourselves a chance to pay off debt / save when the work was done. In financial terms, the project cost us around the same as what we would have paid in rent for a year, and I worked hard renovating the house both whilst I was pregnant (we were trying to complete the work before the birth so I did this full time instead of working) and for some months after the birth. DP?s parents also contributed financially to the project, as did mine. We didn?t ask either sets of parents for this help, but they offered, and we were very thankful.

I am pretty good at handling finances, and have been looking after mine and DP?s budget and outgoings for quite a while (I do this because DP doesn?t want to, and I do enjoy a good spreadsheet(!) ? the arrangement works well enough for us). We have certainly had odd periods where we have overspent but we have learnt from them, and we?ve been on an even keel (paying off credit cards / overdrafts and saving money) for a good while now. We know how much we have to save in order to put down a deposit on a mortgage, and are working on target towards this. We are responsible and everything is budgeted for.

Recently, despite the original agreement under which we moved in, DP?s parents have told us that they now require us to pay them £100 a week, which they will ?look after? for us. They have said that they ?do not believe we will save for a mortgage if it is left to us?, and thus need to control the figure of £100 a week paid to them and have it resting in an account to which they and DP (not myself) have access, though DP is not to touch it without their say so.

I feel really uncomfortable with this arrangement. I could almost understand it if they were saying they had changed their mind and now wanted us to pay rent on the house (but would be a little as that wasn?t the agreement under which we moved in and carried out all the work), but the idea of someone other than DP and I controlling our savings does not sit well with me.

I think that our savings should be in our savings account. This is mostly because it is simply our money, but also because it leaves me in a financially vulnerable position if DP and I were to break up (which I hope to God never happens, and don?t foresee happening, but I guess nothing is ever certain) as none of the money would be in my name. DP and I have just always had ?our money? ? we?ve never been divisive.

I also think we should decide for ourselves how much we are saving, rather than having the figure dictated to us. At the end of the day, we're the ones that face the consequences if we frittered away our cash. We are currently putting away about £60-70 a week and we really are living on a shoe string to do so ? if we gave £100 a week to his parents we would have nothing left in the pot after bills to buy anything that wasn?t the weekly food shop, whether that was some babygrows for DS, a new workshirt for me, a haircut for DP, taking DS to the farm... everything. When I told my ILs they said we could ?ask? them for our money back to buy whatever the item was that we required.

I just don?t want to live like this. I know we are capable of just spending what we need and putting the rest into savings (not least because that's what we've been doing) ? I don?t want to go and have to ask my inlaws for our own money every time I need to buy myself some tights. I have tried to explained this to them but they don?t seem to see the problem. I certainly don?t want to have to ask their permission and for our own money if DP and I want to go out for dinner or something else that?s just for ?enjoyment? (FWIW we?ve been out for dinner once this year so far...).

This is really stressing me out and it?s starting to cause problems between DP and I. If I?d have know at the outset that in order to live in the house we?d have to let DP?s parents control our finances and savings then I?d have said thanks but no thanks ? it is just not a situation that I would be happy with under any circumstances. It feels really controlling and belittling.

AIBU to not want to do this? I think, really, that I would much rather we moved out and made a go of it on our own ? paying rent and saving for a mortgage at the same time like everyone else, even though it would obviously take longer. AIBU?

Oops...ignore that comment. It was for another thread!!!

Oh, it was the right thread, sort of. It's the same op as the other one!

Who needs tv huh?!

If they can renege on the original agreement so blatantly then who's to say they wouldnt move the goalposts on this one when you stepped up for your own savings to be returned to you. They would probably think of some reason or misdemeanour on your parts why they wouldnt return any or all of it to you and there would be nothing you could do. Money in general and families bring out the worst in people so you have a heady combination there ! No I wouldnt trust them - they've got form for not keeping their word. That aside it is as you say also demeaning and infantisizing to you both.

I would say to DP if l were you a blanket 'NO' to this, tell him it's non negotiable and after summarising all your reasons again just refuse to discuss it any further. Let him and his DPs flap around and jump up and down all they like - you just calmly carry on as you were. Wishes she would listen to her own advice when relatives are trying to steamroller her into things

If the original agreement was to live rent-free and build up savings, who were the ones to renege?

How much you save up is you and your partner's affair. It is none of his parents business. The fact that you are living in their house does not make it their business.
I would sit down with them, tell them that you don't want them interfering in your finances and ask them what the problem is with the original agreement and say that you have put alot of work into the house.
Maybe confirm that after 5 years you will definitely move out in case they are concerned you'll be stuck in their house forever.
They have to start seeing you as adults, although it would have helped if you'd both been a bit more responsible re not getting into debt, not getting pregnant whilst still in debt and unmarried etc and ending up this dependent on them.

Claire-bunting is making some valid points.

Maybe the PILs did not intend for any money to be wasted on the old house, and now despairs that instead of saving money, op is now spending their money, her own money and her parents money, to renovate in order to "live in style", rather than take this opportunity to get on the property ladder?

And if only their son earns, it is right that his money is spent on savings that she does not have her name to, rather than her wasting it on paint and curtains?

As the OP has stated they had a five year plan to stick to the agreement and doing up the house was part of that agreement also - before saving. As they are not at the end of the five years yet and have started to fulfill the final part of the agreement by starting to save now the house renovation part is fulfilled then they have not reneged yet imo. The parents have though as they are now insisting they will take command of the saving part - which wasnt the original agreement.

I understood the agreement to be that they could live rent-free if they saved towards a deposit.

They were allowed five years to do this. It is reasonable for the benefactors to check up at regular intervals that they were on track with this, and if not to rethink the whole strategy.

If they wanted to be independent with their finances, they should have had a written rental agreement, and paid a close-to-market-value rent.

If they had 5 years to save they should have started from the get go, and renovated with what was left/they could afford to do. It does not make financial sense to renovate to speck if the property a]does not belong to you b] you don't intend to buy the property

Yes I too am wondering if the renovations are purely superficial . Whilst that kind of thing is very hard work it wont have added significantly to the value of the property.

It is without question unacceptable that they are now ordering the handing over of £100 of your DPs wages each week. Just because they made a kind and generous offer in the first place doesnt give them any rights to this kind of demand.

Now might be a good time for your DP to man up and ask them exactly why they think its ok to even suggest this plan. As you say its causing ongoing problems between you have they mentioned it more than once ?

I think though with another 3 years to run on this agreement I would try and keep it going. However if they persist then move out and barricade yourself against lots of bad feeling all round

'they had a five year plan to stick to the agreement and doing up the house was part of that agreement also - before saving.'
Was it? I can't see where the op says that?

I thought that they were supposed to do the house up & save at the same time.

The idea being that they were living rent free & could therefore save.

But depending on the state of the house, they probably might as well have been renting elsewhere.

Sat 2nd June 9:48 the OP said this

"Edgar 'so the original agreement was

1. five years rent free in return for renovation works
2. you would work down debts together..
3. you would save up for next house

but..

1. you are still clearing debt (not long to go though
2. renovations were expensive and not paid for just by them, but you and your parents also
3. you haven't yet started saving because of 1) and 2)

so...

they want a £100pw contrib which they will count as 'your' savings.

they need to understand that if you could be doing this yourselves, you would be.'

That is exactly how the original agreement and current situation is.:"

and I have got that impression from a few other posts that the renovation was a necessary part of the deal as I understand it because the property wasnt habitable and was to be pulled down and have new build on it. Now post renovations the parents are talking of selling their property and moving back into it when OPs 'tenancy' ends.

I read somewhere once that parents always see their children as they were when they were 12 years old

Can I just say that this might be relevant in only those cases where parents feel unable to loosen their controlling apron strings.

For many of us with grown up children, we accept just that. They have grown up and whilst we'd always be there to help if required, the help comes minus obligation and only when asked for.

I was very fortunate when ex-dh and I first had our dcs and had not long earlier bought a very small house. The mortgate rate rocketed to 15% and my grandmother paid me a small monthly allowance towards living costs which meant I could avoid going back to work full time. But this came with absolutely no agenda. Had it done, I'd have politely refused her help.

However, the OP and her DH are being controlled on a fairly epic scale. Her ILs have moved the goalposts so far as rent is concerned and are now using the OP's sensible way of planning their longer-term finances (deal with debt first then start saving) to justify their need for this £100 a week. Which of course, the OP has no guarantee of ever seeing again.

I'm not sure what the solution is OP, although setting out the indisputable financial facts on a spreadsheet and insisting they take notice is a starter. But you've got to get your DP to realise that his parents aren't actually being helpful here and I realise that this could be difficult. Would he be prepared to move out of this house and rent somewhere more convenient and less costly to run? Because this would be a more sensible option. I'd also not be too worried about saving for a deposit right now but instead, get settled somewhere that doesn't come with dependency on his parents and start from there.

it would be very helpful if the op could clarify what the renovations were. Also wondering what the op is doing for childcare whilst she is working unpaid two days per week

The problem is then this.... they've moved the goalposts once. If they agree to this (and I don't think they should!!), what's then to stop the PILs from withholding the savings if they don't agree with what house or where the OP and her DP want to buy. I can't imagine already having control of that money that they will willingly relinquish control over the process of buying a home.

The son would have access to the money.

"The son would have access to the money."

And so would the ILs.

It´s not their decision how much their son does or doesn´t save per week, is it?

Actually OP-if an account was set up but no money given to them, what would they do??!!

Tell them to piss off, no way would I have someone controlling my finances like this. However, on the otherhand your finances do sound screwed and you seem to be terrible with money.

But they are letting them live rent-free, so their POV is important. The agreement came with strings attached - save money - which they have so far failed to do.

It would have been much better all round to have had a proper rental agreement.

"letting them live rent-free" .. in a property they initially were going to tear down as they felt it wasn't worth selling or living in

the parents expected OP and her DP to do some renovations on the property as well as paying council tax and insurance. Don't even try to suggest that the parents aren't getting something out of this!! Probably more than the OP and her DP. It's very telling that now the parents are considering either selling the property or moving into it themselves after OP and her DP move out.

And the OP already stated they used some of their money to pay off previous debts. Again, financially responsible there - no point saving money while paying on debts with higher interest. Makes more sense to pay off debt first.

Parents moved the goalposts, plain and simple, in an attempt to assert further control over the OP and her DP. And the idea that her DP and the parents have access to their joint savings but the OP doesn't is very telling as well.

OP, way back on 1 June you said that you had £400 outstanding on a credit card. If you handed over £100 per week to your ILs to save, presumably you wouldn't have any means of clearing this credit card, on which you must be paying a lot more interest than any savings scheme the ILs could find? Plus you are still clearing your DPs student overdraft - how will it ever be cleared if your ILs are saving the money that could go to clearing it? Or are the ILs going to use the £100 per week to clear your debts first?

If the ILs do save this money for you instead of clearing debt, how quickly will the uncleared debts cause problems for you, re bad credit ratings and demanding letters through the door?

If you're hoping to get a mortgage eventually, you really don't want a bad credit rating now.

I think the parents moved the goal post because the OP is Little Miss Entitled. God knows if my son brought a woman home like the OP (she has another thread going on here) I would encourage him to cut himself lose from her. That's the truth.

MeCookGoodSock I'm not finding any other threads from the OP. Care to link please?

They haven´t lived rent free.

Not sure what favour the ILs have done tbh.