About my children's inheritance?

[BonyPony]

My MIL sadly passed away a couple of years ago and left a large sum of money to my husband and kids. My FIL is very into financial management and has virtually total control of the account. We have to get his permission to withdraw any of the money.
FIL has been very generous and paid off our previous mortgage so we could move house. Husband hated the previous home, which increased his grief, stress and anxiety. We were happy to move but are now struggling financially with the bills from the new house. I cannot get this money out of my head. It is way more than I could earn in 10 years and it is just sitting there.
Meanwhile, I have been a full time at home parent for many years but husband is now pressurising me to get a job to make ends meet. I don't want to disrupt our home life, especially when all our financial worries would be solved by husband getting FIL to let him have the inheritance he was given!

Should I give up and get a job or stand my ground and insist husband fight for the money? (Also am I evil?)

It doesn’t give him the right to dictate finances to her. I don’t care who provides what; husband and wife are equal within a marriage. This isn’t the 19th century.

The fact they dont have the money coming in is dictating it.

His mythical hidden fortune has been made up by you

OP, what if you didn't have this inheritance to fall back on? Then what?

That money wasn't left for you to squander over the space of a couple of years to pay off bills, just to end up in the exact same situation once the money has gone. The money was there to invest in DH and your children's future.

DP and I bought our first home last year, wouldn't have been able to afford it if it wasn't for his grandma's inheritance. DP wouldn't have been able to take a year off a job he hates to retrain and get a job he now loves. We wouldn't be able to already start saving for our (hopefully) future children which already has more money in it than we'd be able to save ourselves over the next 10 years. You are being so short-sighted, and honestly you are being quite selfish

You decided to buy a house you could not afford. You knew this going into the house. Nobody buys a house without looking at finances/ingoings/outgoings etc, so surely at some point or another in these conversations it will have cropped up that you will need to get a job at some point

You will regret spending the money when you get older.

She did, in the very first post.

She didnt say dh has a substantial amount. And the title and the rest of her posts say clearly. The children's money.

You have questioned people comprehension and yet dont seem to understand even the title.

The OP thinks otherwise. Why?

So, let's say, for the sake of argument, there is money left of the husband's. The OP clearly, based on her posts, not conjecture or suspicion or anything else, thinks she has the right to use her children's money to find her lifestyle choice. I find that horrifying, and hard to believe anyone would think that.

I think it’s about openness and respect really.

Yes of course, if they really have messed up financially and now find themselves in a situation where her working a few more hours would make a significant difference, then she needs to step up do what she can ASAP. No question.

But on the flip side, if he is concealing something or patronising her, then this is abusive. How many wealthy men actually insist their wives gets cleaning jobs - really?

Wishihad - working wardrobe is a bit different for a full time job out of the house, than for serving lunch to primary kids while wearing a tabard. And the chances are she's walking to that - full time work while coordinating drop off and pickup to and from one or more school/childcare settings may require buses, trains or a car

Erm what bit of the marriage vows covered ‘man provides financially for wife for ever more?’

The bit where we promised to support, love, honour and cherish each other. I am not going to get into a debate about marriage. You clearly have a very different idea of it than I do, and I would never, ever marry on the basis that it would anything like yours.

So, let's say, for the sake of argument, there is money left of the husband's. The OP clearly, based on her posts, not conjecture or suspicion or anything else, thinks she has the right to use her children's money to find her lifestyle choice. I find that horrifying, and hard to believe anyone would think that.

I disagree with her on that point as well and have clearly said so. It is irrelevant to my point. 🤷🏻‍♀️

She didnt say dh has a substantial amount. And the title and the rest of her posts say clearly. The children's money.

Oh, read the thing. I’m bored of you now.

But on the flip side, if he is concealing something or patronising her, then this is abusive. How many wealthy men actually insist their wives gets cleaning jobs - really?

Who said he was wealthy? Or concealing something? Only posters here. Not the op

You clearly have a very different idea of it than I do, and I would never, ever marry on the basis that it would anything like yours.

And I would never marry on the basis that it would be anything like yours.

And that’s fine. Presumably we married people who are on the same page as us.

The point is that the OP and her partner are not. They may have been in the past, but they’re not now.

Wishihad - working wardrobe is a bit different for a full time job out of the house, than for serving lunch to primary kids while wearing a tabard. And the chances are she's walking to that - full time work while coordinating drop off and pickup to and from one or more school/childcare settings may require buses, trains or a car

He hasnt said she has to work fulltime or get an office job. Or involves a long commute.

That cant be budgeted for until she is discussing applying or even accepting a job

This thread is utterly baffling, apart from the unanimous agreement that it is BU to use your children's inheritance to subsidise being a SAHM.

The OP (who appears to have dipped out of the discussion) seems to have little idea of the family's true financial circumstances, and to be very reluctant to contemplate getting back to work.

Unless OP is being cagey about revealing what she knows, I can't see how she can contemplate making any decisions on the basis of such scant information. I'd be wanting to know things like

• how big is the gap between income and outgoings
• what scope is there for reducing those outgoings
• how much capital is left from DH's inheritance and is it accessible
• the terms of the original will
• what provision there is for their pensions/life insurance

Only then can they have an informed discussion about what is the best way to proceed.

If it turns out that they're spending hundreds a week on food shopping or a flash car, and the shortfall is only £50 pw, then maybe there is no financial need for the OP to return to work. A few smallish economies may be enough to bridge the gap. If it's huge, then they may need to move to a cheaper property to reduce their outgoings.

I'd be gagging to get back to work, to start building my own pension and increasing my earning potential, but I realise we're all different.

I'm bemused by the lack of financial transparency in this marriage.

Oh, read the thing. I’m bored of you now.

The dh and 3 kids inherited a substantial amount.

Out of his cut, he has spent a substantial amount. paying off the mortgage and a holiday if a life time.

No where does she say he has loads of money left.

Notice you are ignoring her title and subsequent posts.

“I don't want to disrupt our home life, especially when all our financial worries would be solved by husband getting FIL to let him have the inheritance he was given!”

That was in the OP - “the inheritance he was given.” So is it his money or not? Sounds like it, but who knows.

The point is that the OP and her partner are not. They may have been in the past, but they’re not now.

What a bizarre idea of what is reasonable you have. Because he is now on a different page, she is suddenly a lazy scrounger who needs to turn her life upside down IMMEDIATELY, whereas he, because of his penis, probably, gets to dictate to her and have things go on pretty much as before for himself.

Sure. Good luck.

What a bizarre idea of what is reasonable you have. Because he is now on a different page, she is suddenly a lazy scrounger who needs to turn her life upside down IMMEDIATELY, whereas he, because of his penis, probably, gets to dictate to her and have things go on pretty much as before for himself.

Omg you really do spout the most ridiculous nonsense.

Omg you really do spout the most ridiculous nonsense.

It seems fairly aligned with your philosophy, Laurie. Which part of it doesn’t quite work?

“I'm bemused by the lack of financial transparency in this marriage.”

Yes I think this is the main issue.

That was in the OP - “the inheritance he was given.” So is it his money or not? Sounds like it, but who knows.

But she wants the money that belongs to her kids. Possibly in addition to anything left in DHS name.

Clearly if she wants both,what dh has left cant be that.

The title and all her other posts make it clear it's the kids money that will finance this.

@herculepoirot2

You keep claiming that the DH is allegedly insisting she find a job AND do all the housework so he can "sit on his pile of coins"

She never said that.

The closest she came was "I don't think DH will step up so that won't be fun."

She doesn't think he will, not he said he won't.

I disagree with her on that point as well and have clearly said so. It is irrelevant to my point

Since it's very clear this is the children's money, i am unsur why folks are arguing themselves into a snotty mess that she should be able to not work if it's the husbands.

It's the kids. That's the point of the thread. If you want to start a discussion on being able to not work if your husband has money, crack on, start your own thread. Don't hijack the ops.

Totally agree with @LakieLady

It is bonkers to spend your children's inheritance.

But it is also crazy to live beyond your means without understanding by how much or to have any plan for this beyond spending your children's capital. Many many families have to ensure that they budget for their children's leisure activities /hobbies, outings etc. Telling your children that they maybe need to pick one of their activities to focus on right now is not letting your children down. Nor is reining in buying them masses of stuff, or expecting them to have some things second hand. Or using after school care. Or working a Saturday morning for a bit whilst you need some extra cash. All totally normal and expected.

OP, if you cut the volunteering, could you get a part time job 2-3 days a week so not after school care every day? Be honest, could you also cut down on a few non essentials to balance the budget?

She doesn't think he will, not he said he won't.

So that needs to be discussed and a reasonable solution agreed. Where is the recognition of that on this thread?

And the OP seems under the impression that a portion of the remaining inheritance belongs to her DH. Others have desperately flailed around trying to ‘prove’ otherwise but so far they have been unsuccessful, at least as far as my ability to read what the OP actually said is concerned.

Also, if you borrow from your kids now, you will never pay them the full amount back. Kids don't get lots and lots cheaper - you may be able to work more but teenagers are expensive. And if you spend their money, you should also be paying it back with the interest that it would have earned.