To not see the difference between saving and inheritance?

[vibecheck]

If you were planning a fairly expensive holiday with a partner, and you’d agreed to save the money for it, but when it came time to book and pay Partner A revealed that they hadn’t saved anything and would use gifted money from a recent birthday to pay their half, would you be annoyed?

I can’t understand the difference between saving and spending money I have been gifted, but I’ve really upset my husband.

For various reasons we have separate savings accounts so he wasn’t aware that I hadn’t “saved” my half from my salary.

To be honest, if me and OH had agreed to "save" money, i.e. by definition, go without and make sacrifices, I'd be severely pissed off to find out that he'd continued to spend and spend and rely on a gift/inheritance, when I'd restricted my own spending, gone without treats, or whatever. I think OP is being very unreasonable to basically lie about the saving (or lack of it).

Reading this OP, you come across as pretty selfish and arrogant, living and spending with the assumption others will hand you ££, did you pay your DH the £3k back for your wedding?
Living within your means isn't borrowing and living off other peoples money.

@HerMammy yep, paid the 3k back pretty quickly, and I don’t live off other people’s money - the money is mine and in my name. My surviving parent sometimes gifts us money for various birthdays or occasions or with a purpose, all done above board and with the assistance of their financial advisor. I also earn my own money on top of anything else. I’m irritated by that phrase “living off other people’s money” as it’s simply not true and hasn’t been since I left university. As a couple of other people who clearly have experience of this sort of set up have pointed out, the inheritance, trusts and investments I have are capital and income just as much as a wage is.

Former HNW / trusts and probate solicitor here. Unsure what everyone is on about. Even 10 holidays a year aren't going to bankrupt most trusts, let alone make a dent in the capital – especially as it doesn't sound like OP and DH are living it up in The Plaza royal suite or anything like that. That isn't the issue here at all.

The main issue is both parties in the couple reassuring each other that they perceive each other's labour as equally worthwhile (in our arbitrary but inescapable context of capitalist morality)...

You’re going to get a lot of criticism OP, unfortunately. Not many people will be able to relate to your background, and many will have preconceived notions about the type of person you are and what you should be/should be doing. Rather than it being considered a perspective based on a different financial reality, you will be ‘wrong’ and required to justify yourself. I’ve encountered it myself, but thankfully not in my personal relationships. It is one of the reasons why I looked to date men, and married one, from a similar financial background to me. Being on the same page financially IS important, more so than is often acknowledged.

I do think the problem is that you come from completely different worlds, but rather than accepting this he’s resentful, and expects you to change your outlook to match his. At the very least I think it would be valuable to sit down and talk through it all with him, ideally with the help of a neutral third party that isn’t going to take a side. It isn’t fair of him to put his expectations on you like he is doing, trying to force you to adhere to his way because he considers it to be the right one. Just as it wouldn’t be fair of you to try and change him.

This. From what OP’s described she is absolutely not some wastrel blowing through her family’s accumulated wealth.

you come from completely different worlds, but rather than accepting this he’s resentful, and expects you to change your outlook to match his

But you could say exactly the same about the OP. She is showing no understanding of his perspective at all.

It also sounds like many people don't know what a trust fund is. The whole point is longevity and stability. Plus again, some wedding money and a holiday is hardly splashing it on being a casino high-roller. The critical issue here is marital, not financial.

I would be pissed off with you given you've done this before and he ended up bailing you out. I'd be seeing a future where you don't save and I have to pay for everything.

The OP hasn't said what kind of trust it is though. It could just be a bare trust that she got access to at 25, with no provision made for longevity.

And the OP also hasn't mentioned amounts. We have no idea whether she is just comfortably provided for, or UHNW.

Just to add on to my earlier posts – I also come from a very different financial background to DH and don't understand (honestly secretly find annoying) the morality he attaches to money. Just read a few histories of money, or ask any economist – it's ultimately a made-up concept, a useful fiction engineered by those at the top to keep the masses in thrall. If you can have a bigger bite of the pie, why not?

But think about it as an exercise in teamwork, rather than concerning the money itself. Sharing and working towards a joint goal is always fruitful and bonding. I also find DIY and home maintenance utterly unappealing and pointless, but enjoy working alongside DH for an outcome he finds worthwhile. He finds a lot of my predilections, passions and hang-ups odd too, but is always there with me for the journey, in a respectful and non-condescending manner.

@aSofaNearYou

well you might, but her DH doesn't have that worry- at all.

As with so many MN threads, the issue isn't actually whether 1000 randoms think you are BU or not.

Your DH thinks you are. You can't see why. I'm not sure this is something you can resolve or work around long term.

I’ve acknowledged that she can’t force him to view money the same way that she does.

A lot of the advice being given is coming from the perspective that OP is wrong, needs to change to suit him, and see it from his perspective. Yet there’s no expectation for him to return the favour.

well you might, but her DH doesn't have that worry- at all.

Because? It's already happened once - and if I were him that would be a sore spot for me since she had agreed to save it and just didn't. That was very selfish of her. I would be pissed off at indications that that mentality was still there.

@vibecheck

I think the vast majority of posters simply have no concept of your family wealth or what it means to have the provisions in place that you do.

the rudeness comes from ignorance (& envy)

it's unusual not to marry someone from
a similar background. You & your DH couldn't be further apart in the way you were brought up. I don't think either of you can truly understand fully each other's position.

you're going to have to do some serious thinking about your marriage.

He doesn't want to share/pool money, he wants to THINK he's independent (even though he's not) He doesn't want it to seem like he's taking money from you, but he is (things like you buying your house means he's mortgage free, so 'getting' money from you every month. Plus other things you mentioned.

He (while living in your house etc) wants you to make your life smaller & less pleasant. He wants to control your life/lifestyle.

you're well set up to enjoy your life (as your parents intended & were able to do for you) whilst still working & earning your own income.

Do you really want to be with someone who is trying to control you so much & make you feel bad about your good fortune??

The OP has said more than enough to know this is much much bigger and ongoing that what she has received in this birthday amount

She doesn’t need to provide a full financial breakdown. She’s said enough for us to know that she isn’t in any danger of running out of money by doing what she has been.

As with so many MN threads, the issue isn't actually whether 1000 randoms think you are BU or not.

Your DH thinks you are. You can't see why. I'm not sure this is something you can resolve or work around long term
Agree with this.

It's irrelevant what any of us think.The person who matters is finding it very difficult being on completely different financial pages from their spouse and has found out that their spouse lies to them about finances.

There's going to have to be a serious discussion about finances, probably with a mediator or therapist to facilitate, or this relationship is going to to end up like many others with financial disagreements: over or continuing with brewing resentment.

Sure. But we don't know exactly what criteria he'd put on joint finances.

This is why I'm asking if she has shown signs of change since the wedding incident. Which is not in terms of paying back the money - it's in terms of paying back the trust.

I married my husband knowing that he was an overworker, and in fact we had a tiff a couple of days before the wedding when we were supposed to leave a couple of hours earlier, but he was finishing up work. And again, on our way to the airport for our honeymoon, he took it to the wire. (In fairness, in both of these incidents, I was overreacting to the cause, and there was no material detriment by taking the extra time).

But then there were a couple of further incidents with holidays, and he was generally strung out/not the man I loved. I made it quite clear to him that our relationship couldn't continue, and I sure as hell wasn't starting a family with him working like that.

And he changed. Formed a plan to get a new job, followed it through, and demonstrated that our shared future and aims were important to him. I had to change too! I have to relinquish the control I always had and share more decisions with him.

Just because we were in a certain position when we married, doesn't mean we had to lump it for life. That's a cop out.

Bad take, I think. And I'm speaking as someone who genuinely only became familiar with non-upper-floor buttons in hotel lifts after marrying DH and going on holiday with him. The fundamental personality traits of the person you choose to build a life with are far more important than which set of lift buttons either of you are predisposed to look at. Suite life with a shithead still isn't going to be any fun, whereas you can have lots of fun and meaning with a good person in any circumstances.

But you haven't earned them. Somebody else did - and you didn't even want to get married enough to bother saving £100 a week for 7 months to pay your share, you carried on as normal and then just wailed a bit until other people stumped up the dough.

I know this is about general attitude to spending, but to me a lot depends on how funds much you actually have sitting waiting for you.

If it's enough for you to be mortgage free, have enough for a comfortable pension and - worst case scenario- to cover living costs if you couldn't work for whatever reason, then it would be silly to quibble over the origin of a few thousand or whatever the holiday costs.

However if that's the case, why not just say you were paying for your share from the trust fund, rather than pretending you were planning to save for it?

I don’t think she needs to be jumping through hoops to suit his mindset. The reality if she doesn’t need to change in order to achieve the same result, he’s expecting her to because of his own beliefs in regards to the ‘right way’ of getting money.

From what OP has said, he expects her to compromise to suit him. In his eyes, she is wrong and he is right. He’s not trying to see her perspective, or adapt his own way of thinking.

She doesn’t have his mindset and he can’t force her to any more than she can force him to have it. Attempts will only result in resentment from one or both. Unfortunately they appear to be financially incompatible, and whether that’s something that can be surmounted or not I don’t know 🤷🏻‍♀️