To not side with Sis over her ex

[PrFi]

My sis & her ex (bil) were together 22 years & about 2 years ago they separated, they never married & have 2 DD 17 & 19. Prior to their separation we were always together as a foursome & saw each other several times a week plus my DH & he are very close friends. Their split was amicable & mutual, both just decided that relationship had run its course but we were all naturally upset about it. Bil moved into a flat that he owns & sis stayed in house, the house is bil’s (inherited from his parents) but he wanted kids to stay in their home so he moved out. My sis doesn’t work & bil has been paying bills, all child expenses, her credit card, her private pension & healthcare since he left but he now says once DD leaves for uni this will all stop as he’s not bank rolling her anymore & he has told my sis that once youngest DD turns 18 & leaves for uni he wants his house back. He has also met someone else which I did know about but didn’t say anything to sis as he said wasn’t sure how serious it was plus it’s not my business. Anyway all hell has broken loose now & my sis is threatening all sorts but main problem is that she has asked me to cut him off completely, he’s not to come to our home or speak to us on phone, we’re not to meet up socially or invite him to any functions etc. I don’t agree we should as he is my niece’s Dad & has done absolutely nothing wrong & he is very much part of our lives still but if I don’t I could lose my sis..I’m torn but I don’t think she’s right to expect this from us

If she worked for half their relationship and then presumably contributed domestically and with childcare during the other half IMO she should be entitled to a significant share of the equity of their shared house. If they had been married she would be. He has been 'generous' in the wrong way, funding her short term rather than helping her towards a financially secure future. He clearly wanted the children to maintain the same lifestyle until they reached adulthood rather than wanting to treat her fairly.

Whilst in hindsight, this would have been easier solved had they married, the situation is as it is.
She has been very foolish not to make steps to secure her future when they separated. Surely she knew this arrangement would come to an end?

Obviously legally he has no obligation, since he is "very wealthy" and clearly a thoughtful and generous guy, would he consider agreeing to some sort of 'settlement' payment, in exchange for cutting any financial ties?

Yes, she's been foolish not to secure any rights by marriage, and foolish to depend on someone to provide her with an income, but he's allowed it and how 'fortunate' for him that he now gets to sack off his long term partner and mother of his children.

Paying all her bills, plus spending money, for 2+ years, and then continuing to support her to live rent free is not sacking her off though is it. Plus she has a pension he's paid into and savings OP says she can live off for a while (so obviously not insubstantial).

God, so he also has a business on top!!!
He has shafted her royally.

Did he ever propose? (Bet he didint)

This feels like theres a lot of projection going on here

Always sis over BIL for me too.

BIL is not being entirely fair here as it sounds like ther are crossed wires?

If he's so extremely rich, why is he only offering her the flat "while she gets herself sorted" - he should give her the flat? Surely she's entitled to at least that - morally if not legally? Will he be paying his dd's uni fees/maintenance or costs while they set themselves up or is he cutting them off as well?

But yes she does need a nudge to get back to work - if she worked until 2010 (when he "inherited a vast amount of money") then surely she can find work again?

Excellent point.

OP, did your BIL ever propose and your SIL turned him down?

22 years together and raising his children from birth to adults and he wants to leave her with the shirt on her back - for a new woman - he is not a nice man.

He says she can live in the flat for free - that will be short lived I expect. He should as a minimum be giving her the flat outright. He has used your sister to birth and rear his children and now he is finished with her he doesn't want to leave her with what she deserves.

Ladies that post on here "why get married" need to be linked to this thread as a warning. If they had married not only would they share put the house, flat, pensions but also the calie of the business. She would likely be a wealthy woman.

FFS - why didn't she get married, particularly when their finances changed substantially in 2010? Is she thick?

She needs to see a lawyer. I suspect they will say he is being fair.

I do think she has a right to have a major say on whether he should attend family events ongoing. The norm is that ex-partners don't attend

projection is right- I’m not even mad that the sister got shafted, I’m mad his doing it whilst smiling at her family, and her family are fucking smiling back! They want to remain friends with this guy! That’s what’s so wrong about it all!

Wow. Zero empathy from you at all for her. But lots for him. I hope she has good friends who can provide non-judgemental support.

OP it is fairly obvious you are concerned about everyone else's feelings except your sister.

As emotional intelligence seems to be severely lacking in you and your husband I'd say tell your sister you don't have the bandwidth to support her emotionally and suggest she seeks legal advice

Any reason she couldn't ask him being as we're in the 21st century?

You can't pander to your sister, OP. It seems like she's been handed everything on a plate and always gets what she wants so that might be why she thinks she calls all the shots. If so, this can't be allowed to go on.

She needs to be reminded that you love her and want the best for her, you know she's scared deep down about all the changes that are coming in her life, but that she has no right to dictate to you and other family members.

As far as I know they seriously discussed it when the girls were really young but decided it wasn’t worth the fuss (her words) my sister finds romance really cringeworthy so she’d hate a proposal, would want the ground to swallow her up she said but when we have mentioned it subsequently over the years she always just said she can’t be arsed with all that fuss

What, she thought that if their DC carried on living at home until their mid-20s he's still bankroll her? She's deluded.

I know standing back smiling and supporting him while he shafts her sister. It's actually comical

I think your loyalties lie with your sister, OP.

The split might have been amicable but she is hurt by being replaced, in every way. She is facing huge changes in her life and another woman is likely moving into her home. She’s expressing herself with anger and bitterness but there will be a lot of fear there too. She needs your support.

FWIW I think it’s appalling that your parents would consider inviting him to their party, I sincerely hope he isn’t considering bringing the new GF, that would be so insensitive.

I don’t think you need to cut her ex off, but I think you should keep him at arms length for a bit. Your DH is free to do his own thing as far as their friendship goes but it shouldn’t involve you. And I would not meet or entertain the new GF until you’re sure your sister would be comfortable with that.

Sounds like he didn’t want to marry her and she was trying to save face. Who “wouldn’t be bothered with all the fuss”, when you could go to a registry office with no one knowing to do it.

why wouldn’t he ‘smile in the face’ of his own friends, the blood relatives of his daughters? What has he done wrong, exactly? Yes, she’d be entitled to more if they were married, but they weren’t so she isn’t. She was an active participant in choosing to have children without that security, and giving up work.

He hasn’t shafted her, - in fact he’s been very generous when he hasn’t needed to be - she’s shafted herself.

Of course I have empathy for her but it doesn’t change her situation. Cutting him off won’t make her situation any better.

Even if you are very close to someone, it can be quite difficult to see if they are free to make certain decisions. My ex was financially controlling, refused to marry me once I moved in with him (was meant to have been marrying shortly afterwards) and made it practically impossible to accept any of the job offers I got that would have moved my career onwards. He wanted me working part time and being a good housewife.

Yes, I should have got out sooner, but all the deposit I had to my previous rental had gone towards furniture for the house (one of my contributions for living there) and I no longer had more than a part time zero hour job to find my own place. I'm sure it all looked wonderful on the outside for people - him owning multiple properties, nice houses, holidays... but I had very little access to money, wasn't paying into a pension or able to build up any savings.

Yes, in some small ways my ex was financially useful when we split. But I was still left with a career in tatters and nowhere to live as he owned all the properties. Luckily I was with him for far, far less time, but it still took 3.5 years to pick up the pieces with my career and housing (not helped by a pandemic and state of the rental market in the middle).

She's been with him for 20 years. She's 20 years behind on getting on the housing market, starting a career, earning a pension... Yes, she needs to now stand on her own two feet and he's already helped out for 2 years, but she's still got a mountain to climb and he's ready to just move the next woman into the house.

He carries on with his life with everyone thinking he's wonderful and been so supportive for the last couple of years.. and her life is screwed.

I think the “she raised his children” argument became irrelevant ten years ago when the youngest started secondary.

But ultimately the women in these situations need to take some personal responsibility here. You live with, and have children with someone without being married, then you face the reality that if that relationship ends, or worse, if the other partner dies, then you end up with nothing.

Ending up with nothing is a choice she made when she didn’t push for marriage. If she’d wanted marriage and he didn’t she could have left, but she didn’t.

And the kids started secondary years ago so there was 0 excuse for her not being in work.

He’s been generous in paying all her bills, including her credit card and letting her live rent free in the house until the youngest turned eighteen. Some might say that he owed her that morally, but he could easily have told her to move out and legally she wouldn’t have been able to do a thing about it.

But again, if this was a man nobody would be saying that the woman should be giving him a flat.

Equally if a woman posted here that she’d inherited a house people would be urging her to never get married to her partner.

But this is mn where double standards abound.

I wouldn't put it quite so forthright! But I agree totally. I am wondering why her family aren't gently encouraging him to compensate her with some housing at the very least. You can afford to be magnanimous when you get to leave with all the assets. Their daughter/sister is effectively being left without a home. Aren't they concerned?

Also the daughters may be onside with him now but what happens when they realise how vastly different their parents fared in this relationship?

What @RamblingFar said.

At the end of the day they weren't married so what she would have got is irrelevant and by the sounds of it he inherited the business and money so its not like he was off building a vast business empire while she was caring for the kids. She quit working so seems like a choice maybe made together but may have been her own.

He didn't need to give her a house, paying for her pension, health care, 5k credit card bill and whatever else and she obviously wasn't too prideful to accept but she's too good for a nice 3 bedroom flat? It's ridiculous.

Also it seems like he's given her some notice, it's not like he's kicking her out next week.

She didn't need to be a leech for the last 2 years but she chose not to try and become independent and the children also weren't that young at the time