Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

PIL and holiday home

69 replies

Champagnecharleyismyname · 20/02/2014 21:02

Big back story here with relationship with PIL but latest is they are buying a holiday home in another country. They are very excited and have said it is for family use.

There are three brothers, oldest 2 are from first marriage. Large age gap and last brother is only child from FIL and MIL.

PIL about to sign contract on new holiday home and rang today to say it will be in youngest brother's name as it has been bought with inheritance money from a relative of FIL.

DH is upset but won't talk about it. AIBU to question this??

OP posts:

Groovee · 21/02/2014 12:15

I get where you are coming from. My brother's 3 daughters get Sweet FA while their half brother gets everything he wants!

It's not about the holiday house but the way distinction often gets made about your inlaws being both parents to their son while the step sons are made to feel left out.

curiousgeorgie · 21/02/2014 12:18

I would be really upset..

I have a stepfather who is in every way my dad and has been since I was very young, he and my mum had my younger brother when I was a teenager but we're not treated at all differently, it's awful when this happens.

Can he say anything? To his mother maybe?

nyldn · 21/02/2014 12:46

OP is your DH and other brother legally adopted by FIL? if not, this could add to some sort of tax implication and reason why it was put in the biological child's name only....

firesidechat · 21/02/2014 13:04

But, I fail to see why this money is just the FIL's? In a marriage, surely if one inherits, then they choose to share with their spouse. I could never envisage inheriting money and keeping it all to myself.

Agree with this.

The attitude of "your money" and "my money" between married couples that I see on MN really surprises me. If I inherited anything from my parents (I won't) then it would be family money, not my money.

As far as I can see the money that the fil inherited became part of the family pot and should be treated as such. It all seems very unfair and divisive.

onelittlepiglet · 21/02/2014 13:05

Hmm tricky. The thing is, if it is put in one person's name then this is the person that legally owns it and gets to to with it what they want. Your PIL might want it to be for family use but they are creating a difficult situation here. Your dh's youngest brother is under no obligation to share this holiday home with anyone if it's in his name.

I'm only mentioning this as When my dh's grandad died (years before I met dh) he left his holiday home to his son intending him to look after it and let his daughter (my mil) use it too. Dh's uncle has never allowed anyone to use it since he inherited it and has recently sold it for a tidy sum and kept the money despite being considerably better off that mil. But it was left to him, in his name so he can do what he likes. Despite the best intention of dh's grandfather, this legally does not stand.

defineme · 21/02/2014 13:20

I think this is a generational thing.
I have heard of this sort of thing a lot, but I think things are changing.
The thought that dh and I would keep any money from anywhere separate is laughable.
However, having seen children receive nothing because of 2nd wives and so forth I can see how it could be upsetting.
On the other hand, as someone whose parents will be leaving me nothing and I'll probably end up supporting dm, YABU-it's not that important. Help dh to focus on the fact that he was cared for as a child, rather than seeing this as a sign of lack of love.

firesidechat · 21/02/2014 13:34

By family money I mean a married couples money, not that your fil should feel obliged to hand any of it over to his children. Your mil and fil could spend all the inheritance on a world cruise and a huge donation to the cat's home if they wanted to, but singling out one son seems wrong.

Original poster

Champagnecharleyismyname · 21/02/2014 14:02

Thank you, these responses have really helped me gain perspective. It is after all only a very small part of the story. I have no idea what PIL intend to do with their estate and why would we, it is none of our business. It is their money to do with what they will.

It just feels they are singling out the youngest for different treatment now which does feel divisive. Interestingly the other brothers had already discussed this and without saying in any more just in case MIL is a mumsnetter there are a number of examples of lots more 'help' given to the youngest. The middle brother especially feels this. I have not heard his view yet!

OP posts:

Adeleh · 21/02/2014 14:23

But some children need more 'help'. I know my Dsis gets hurt that her inlaws spend far more money and time on her nephew than on her two children, but her nephew lives in a much less affluent and less stable household. If I were a grandparent I'd be giving more to the grandchild who had less and who needed me more. Equal shares of money doesn't always mean that things are absolutely fair. And I think it's absolutely fair to leave more to someone who doesn't have any other side of the family from whom they might inherit. My Dad pointed out that my children only have my parents as grandparents, whereas my siblings' children all have another set of grandparents, so he's going to give them a little bit more at birthdays and Christmas. My siblings think that's fair. When we were growing up they both got a car when I didn't because I was the youngest and things changed by the time I was at that stage. What I'm trying to say is that there are swings and roundabouts. Things aren't always going to be divided absolutely equally every single time, and quite often nor should they be.

Badvoc · 21/02/2014 14:28

Did the relative of fil stipulate it was to go to your fils bio son?

Original poster

Champagnecharleyismyname · 21/02/2014 16:29

Could be that relative did stipulate that the money goes to youngest son but the purchase of the holiday home has been going on a long time and it seems strange that they are only saying now that it will belong to the youngest son.

Fair point about DC needing different help at different times.

My DH has never had contact with his biological father and I think that's what I am struggling with, he as always seen FIL as his father.

There you go maybe blood is thicker than water and naive of me to think otherwise.

OP posts:

Adeleh · 21/02/2014 18:33

I can see that that is hurtful, OP. It's not the money then, it's feeling that he's not the son he thought he was.

MaidOfStars · 21/02/2014 18:52

Please consider (cling to?) the possibility of technical/contractual red tape in the country of relevance. My parents used to own a house in Spain, and inheritance law there at the time meant my brother would get the lot (biological first son). Perhaps step-children can't inherit anyway and this is a quick way to circumvent inheritance tax while avoiding the red tape of forcing this house between the 3 (5?) of them. However, my parents were willing to do it to ensure my right to half their house....

Original poster

Champagnecharleyismyname · 21/02/2014 19:17

Thanks maidofstars that may be the reason. Yes I think possibly DH has not considered the whole own son thing which could mean PIL did an ok job of not treating differently when they were growing up.

I think I am feeling it as I saw the look on DHs face when his DM told him.

OP posts:

Berryglitter · 21/02/2014 20:19

My step dad raised me from the age of 18months, my half sister came along 8 years later. He has brought her a nice car, paid her uni fees etc etc... Doesn't bother me! It's his money, that's his daughter, I'd never expect him to worry about doing the same for me. He brought me up, is/was my father figure, that means more to me then any financial purchase he could make for me.

YABU, you get to use the holiday home, make memories there.

SirChenjin · 21/02/2014 20:23

YANBU

He has 3 children, not one.

mynewpassion · 21/02/2014 20:40

No he has 5 children. 2 stepson., 1 with MIL, and 2 from a previous relationship

tb · 21/02/2014 20:48

A lot could depend on how long he lives after making this gift, and how it's viewed by the tax authorities of the country where it's situated.

Bricks and mortar always pass according to the inheritance laws of the country where they are.

As an example, my uncle - in his 90s - was born in France but hasn't lived there since 1939 but owns a second home in the village where he was born.

He has made a will in the UK covering his UK assets - house and cash, and another one to cover his French house.

His total estate will come in under the IHT threshhold, but IHT (or droits de succession) will have to be paid in France on the house in France.

Just the way it is, unfortunately, and nothing to where you are tax resident, nor your nationality, just where the bricks and mortar are (or in the case of his house, the straw, mud and sheep crap).

Corygal · 21/02/2014 20:57

Where is the holiday home? In a lot of countries, even if property is owned by UK residents, you have to follow local inheritance law which often means you have to leave it to your children. In mainland Europe you have to leave X percent (most) of your assets to your kids.

PIL may be planning the rest of the inheritance round that.

Flip

1 2 3