Financial situation of in laws

[isthisgreedyofme]

I am writing this to vent and to try to get my head around it.

Been happily married to DH for 15 years, we're in our 40s. Like a lot of people our age, we are doing just about OK for money. Keeping up with the mortgage, childcare costs, etc. is a struggle to be honest, but we scrimp and save, make do, and keep our heads above water. DH has a sort of slightly above averagely paid job; I don't earn enough to pay tax (I run my own business and though I work really hard, it's not going at all well over the pandemic, but that's another story).

Over the years, our in laws have more or less a succession of large presents from us. Things like weekends away at expensive historic properties to celebrate landmark birthdays, large presents, parties etc. We've have had to scrimp and save to do this, and the effort involved hasn't always been appreciated (my MIL complained that the very nice cottage we'd let for her 70th birthday wasn't grand enough). The effort isn't reciprocated - they don't do the same back for us. We also do a lot to help them out in practical terms, which again is not reciprocated.

What is more, they are downright tight in their attitude to money on a more everyday basis, asking us to pay for meals out, drinks, and never donating to charity or good causes. They never give anything that they own away, unless it's broken or junk and more or less worthless, even though their houses is over-full of valuable belongings (there are literally things piled on things in every room to the point that it borders on hoarding).

I've always assumed they were asset-rich but money-poor and been willing to make sacrifices to ensure they have a good time. But I've recently found out that this is not true and that they are actually cash millionnaires. They have over £1.1 million in the bank in ISA-type investments (they are very risk averse), they own a £500k house, and another bungalow without a mortgage. They also have very generous pensions, especially considering that they both gave up work in their 40s plus income from their second house, which they let. Altogether, they have far more coming in than we do, plus this immense cash reserve as a safety net.

This has come out becuase we have been dealing with solicitors recently due to a legal issue they have and the solicitor told them that they might want to consider estate planning to reduce inheritance tax. They said right in front of us that they don't want to do this because they don't know how much they will need for care costs, and they come first. They didn't even stop to think about us, or about BIL (who is financially in a similat position to us). They have form for this - they are very, very self-centred.

AIBU to think they are just really mean? Or am I being grabby in thinking that?

Care costs for two can easily run in excess of £100K per year so they are not being unreasonable to be holding onto their money.

However I would have stopped giving lavish presents long ago.

I honestly don't understand scrimping and saving to give someone a birthday present and then resenting it afterwards

@Acovic when I was in law school our professor said that IHT should be renamed DDT - "denial of death tax"

Going forward, they'd only been cards from me and perhaps a token gift like flowers.

Misers.

* We've have had to scrimp and save to do this*

Yeah, right

this was my inlaws. Tight as a gnat's wotsit, they would engineer it so any meal out with the family that they didn't pay, even though it was them who decided we were going out. He had a good pension and they both had the state pension, own house, etc. Never gave the grandchildren any little bits of pocket money when they saw them, whereas my pretty hard up grannies both gave us all a little bit every week, which was so kind, as a child you appreciate this, and if I ever become a granny I'll do likewise. They spent a lot of time on holidays, no problems, in a top-of-the-range motorhome. But the thought of paying anyone to do things around the house and garden, they'd rather call on one of their children to come and do it for them, even though this cost the child more than it would have cost to have a local gardener/handyman in to travel up to them, and it would have taken the local person a quarter of the time it took to come to them. So instead of enjoying family time and a pleasant stay, it was just constant jobs. Not even time to go out for a drive, to see the countryside or go to a garden centre
They could have moved to a nice easy bungalow had they taken out powers of attorney but left it too late by the time they were persuaded to do so it was too late so only FIL could, MIL was coming down with Alzheimers so the only way they could jointly decide to move was going to the court of protection. I tried to suggest it several years earlier when I could see she was failing but was told none of my business. Basically, everything went downhill from then on, they had not aged proofed the house, so every time there was an accident everything had to be done in an emergency, just so they could go to the loo upstairs, etc, which they had been struggling to do even before the catastrophe. Sorting out steps so they could use them to get out or into their conservatory., safe kitchen appliances. Or even putting in a downstairs loo. Basic stuff like that. So when neither could be safely left alone, they still wouldn't consider moving to be nearer their children to either sheltered accommodation or a home. So they got live-in help, and had the distant children come up every week. Wouldn't get a carer to sit with MIL for an hour or so, while FIL went to the dentist, or a taxi, so one of their children had to come up to take them both, wouldn't find a dentist with disabled access so it wasn't a mission to go there, wouldn't have Specsavers come to the house, for eye tests, one of the children had to go and take them to the nearby optician. Taxis were too dear. And as for investigating the couple of hours respite he could have had for free, well, MIL was actually fine with someone else who knew what they were doing. Early on, I understood that they had friends and a social life they didn't want to leave, but all the friends died or moved away, and they couldn't do any of the things they used to do, and tbh, being in the same 4 walls is pretty much the same wherever you are.

So all their savings went on an adapted extension out of which they got less than a year's use, and when it was sold added little value to the price of the house. Had they done it years earlier, that would probably been a good use of the money, it could have been a part of a house renovation instead of a good extension attached to a house badly in need of repair, had they sold up and moved to somewhere it was easier to help, nearby the children, that would have been ok, they could have had a visit most days from someone, plus a lot less stress for everyone. There would have been money to leave the children, but instead, it was spent on something they hardly got used to. The house on the death of the second inlaw was sold for the same price that unextended houses were going for, and it caused no end of problems when she went into care as it couldn't be sold unless the children went to the court of protection.....
No one is entitled to an inheritance but has gone on about it here because had they both gone earlier before all the emergency spending there would have been inheritance tax to pay. But no way would they consider getting financial advice. Had they done so they could have spent a pleasanter retirement and more peaceful old age for the same monthly outlay or even less, seen more of their children and grandchildren, and left some money to the children and grandchildren.
Sometimes getting a bit of financial advice can make a big difference. Sometimes being tight can shut out such a lot that would make life better for you

@bigbadbedknobs

this was my inlaws. Tight as a gnat's wotsit, they would engineer it so any meal out with the family that they didn't pay, even though it was them who decided we were going out. He had a good pension and they both had the state pension, own house, etc. Never gave the grandchildren any little bits of pocket money when they saw them, whereas my pretty hard up grannies both gave us all a little bit every week, which was so kind, as a child you appreciate this, and if I ever become a granny I'll do likewise. They spent a lot of time on holidays, no problems, in a top-of-the-range motorhome. But the thought of paying anyone to do things around the house and garden, they'd rather call on one of their children to come and do it for them, even though this cost the child more than it would have cost to have a local gardener/handyman in to travel up to them, and it would have taken the local person a quarter of the time it took to come to them. So instead of enjoying family time and a pleasant stay, it was just constant jobs. Not even time to go out for a drive, to see the countryside or go to a garden centre They could have moved to a nice easy bungalow had they taken out powers of attorney but left it too late by the time they were persuaded to do so it was too late so only FIL could, MIL was coming down with Alzheimers so the only way they could jointly decide to move was going to the court of protection. I tried to suggest it several years earlier when I could see she was failing but was told none of my business. Basically, everything went downhill from then on, they had not aged proofed the house, so every time there was an accident everything had to be done in an emergency, just so they could go to the loo upstairs, etc, which they had been struggling to do even before the catastrophe. Sorting out steps so they could use them to get out or into their conservatory., safe kitchen appliances. Or even putting in a downstairs loo. Basic stuff like that. So when neither could be safely left alone, they still wouldn't consider moving to be nearer their children to either sheltered accommodation or a home. So they got live-in help, and had the distant children come up every week. Wouldn't get a carer to sit with MIL for an hour or so, while FIL went to the dentist, or a taxi, so one of their children had to come up to take them both, wouldn't find a dentist with disabled access so it wasn't a mission to go there, wouldn't have Specsavers come to the house, for eye tests, one of the children had to go and take them to the nearby optician. Taxis were too dear. And as for investigating the couple of hours respite he could have had for free, well, MIL was actually fine with someone else who knew what they were doing. Early on, I understood that they had friends and a social life they didn't want to leave, but all the friends died or moved away, and they couldn't do any of the things they used to do, and tbh, being in the same 4 walls is pretty much the same wherever you are. So all their savings went on an adapted extension out of which they got less than a year's use, and when it was sold added little value to the price of the house. Had they done it years earlier, that would probably been a good use of the money, it could have been a part of a house renovation instead of a good extension attached to a house badly in need of repair, had they sold up and moved to somewhere it was easier to help, nearby the children, that would have been ok, they could have had a visit most days from someone, plus a lot less stress for everyone. There would have been money to leave the children, but instead, it was spent on something they hardly got used to. The house on the death of the second inlaw was sold for the same price that unextended houses were going for, and it caused no end of problems when she went into care as it couldn't be sold unless the children went to the court of protection..... No one is entitled to an inheritance but has gone on about it here because had they both gone earlier before all the emergency spending there would have been inheritance tax to pay. But no way would they consider getting financial advice. Had they done so they could have spent a pleasanter retirement and more peaceful old age for the same monthly outlay or even less, seen more of their children and grandchildren, and left some money to the children and grandchildren. Sometimes getting a bit of financial advice can make a big difference. Sometimes being tight can shut out such a lot that would make life better for you

Was there anything stopping you from sometimes saying no to all the jobs?

@18Egghead81 my now ex wouldn't say no, I couldn't make him say no, don't imagine my SIL could persuade BIL either.
With us it did cause a lot of trouble as he deeply resented it and took it out on me

Well it's completely absurd you funnelling your spare cash into them. It's they who should be divesting cash to you and the kids...as mentioned for inheritance tax planning.
The question is how nasty will they turn when the free holidays and dinners out end.

Whether they have a million in the bank or a tenner is irrelevant when it comes to how rude and ungrateful they are. I’d have knocked the expensive presents on the head ages ago after their ungrateful attitudes.

It’s good they’re considering their care costs now, sounds like they can more than afford to pay for all that. Massive weight off your shoulders. And you know why they’re so wealthy- they’re tighter than a ducks arse and don’t even pay for their own dinner when our with you. That must help keep their bank balance healthy.

You aren't being unreasonable to want to ease off the lavish gifts, or to feel irked at their meanness. You need to put a stop to footing the bill all the time.

But you're obviously being unreasonable to expect yours and BILs families to be their main financial priority, and essentially its entirely up to them how they choose to arrange their affairs.