In-laws want their deposit back

[ArnosLeach]

I married 5 years ago and I have a three and a half year old and a nearly nine year old from a short lived relationship.

Full background as I am anticipating the questions I would want answering.

The nine year old sees their father once a month for a weekend. I assume that my ‘ex’ owns his house. He had a vasectomy before our child was born. We do not communicate on any level other than if arrangements need to change. He pays a set amount every month but every month will buy shoes/clothes etc.

We moved into the house my husband had bought fifteen years before. It has doubled in value. Following a miscarriage last year we are trying to conceive again and we are looking to move house. We mentioned this to the in-laws a fortnight ago. I did not know that they had provided DH with deposit.
They have now asked for twice the deposit back comprising the original sum and the proportion of what that deposit has added to the value.

They feel that my elder child will benefit from their largesse. We are both completely gutted by this. A bolt out of the blue.

Her ex had the vasectomy AFTER the child was conceived, but before they were born (9 month window).

I inferred it was important because it demonstrates ex is not very engaged, didn’t want kids, and that her eldest child is more her DH’s child than the ex’s? Ie DH probably treats her first child as his own, and they expected his parents to feel the same?

The thing is though, they've got no basis to ask OP or her DH to do anything, giving him a gift of £80k towards a house 20 years ago doesn't entitle them to choose how he lives his life now, or ask him to draw up wills to favour of their preference of grandchild.

As a comparison, OP's brother in law (who also received £80k towards a house) could split up with his wife and she could take half of their house in the divorce settlement, go off and marry and have kids with someone else and be free to profit off that original £80k investment with a different family altogether and there's absolutely nothing the parents can do about it as it was a gift.. would they then ask the brother for his £80k back?

none of it makes sense.

And there is no reason on earth that the original money should have been kept a secret, unless there's more to this story than OP realises and I suspect that is more likely.

Same. Their behaviour is outrageous.

@Iwasafool

The plan currently is to retain ownership of a property for each DC to live in while they save for a deposit of their own - for as long as they need rent free.

Then should they marry or want to purchase a property to support the legal fees relative to ring fence their assets and any potential gift from us, and should their partner not be able to match them financially I will only give the give on the basis that they be tenants in common to have the unequal contribution outlined in black and white.

It isn’t controlling its common sense rather than them and us being fleeced by a free loader and/or any offspring they bring to the partnership. I absolutely would not be paying large amounts of money to support somebody I’m not related to.

If his parents had donated a large sum I wouldn’t have been massively offended if they wanted to ensure their bio grandchildren alone benefitted.

I would, because quite frankly it's none of their business, donating money to a child to buy a house is exactly that, it's not an invitation to rule their finances for ever more.. if it was that important to them that their investment wasn't 'mismanaged' they could have stipulated that the investment money was to be repaid on the sale of the house.

OPs DH is well within his rights to tell them to stick it.. the fact that he kept it secret all this time and is now trying to appease his parents by way of a compromise by offering to pay back the £80k tells me there's more to this story than even OP is aware of.

I know of two people who died childless and left their money to their nieces and nephews. Both had sisters who adopted children. These adopted nieces and nephews were left out of the wills. Imagine how vile someone would have to be not to accept adopted children as family members.

Money makes some people turn evil.

I'm staggered. However, my sibling had 2 children and is with neither father. She then married a horrible man and he's a money grabber. The husband has 2 children also from a previous marriage. If my sister inherits off my parents and then dies before her horrible husband, he will leave/gift my parents money to his own children, not my sister's children. Perhaps this is why they're concerned about your child inheriting their money should your partner die? I don't agree in them asking for the money back, they can't move goalposts. It was a gift. They could just leave less in their will to him. To pull the rug from under you now is cruel and very ballsy. Suggest your husband inherits nothing in return? Goodness know what they've already put in their wills but they sound mean.

Wouldn't the more obvious solution to put a charge on the house so that if it's sold your original investment comes back to you? Rather than dictate what happens to the proceeds of that original investment further down the line?

Surely you see the problems involved in treating your grandchildren differently if they're not technically related to you? Children don't ask to be born into certain families, from the sounds of it OPs child would have been 2/3 when they got together, 4 when they married, I wonder if he just sees his wife as a 'freeloader' and his stepdaughter as his wife's 'offspring' just because she's not fortunate enough to have rich parents, or whether he sees her as his own child having raised her for the last 6-7 years?

Protect your investment, yes, of course, that way you will always have that money available to help your child, but I personally think it's disgusting to dictate to your children who they can and can't choose to benefit from anything that happens AFTER your initial investment, if he wants to treat his step daughter as his real offspring, who are you to interfere in that?

I may have that completely wrong, but it seems like unless they already come from money, you see anyone other than your own child a second class citizen in comparison, ready to take them for every penny, it can be a really damaging dynamic in families and I'd be careful how you approach that with your children.

Just say no!! The end nrt

Ah. I Didn't realise it was a gift.!! In that case don't even consider paying it back. Husband should let them know he wouldn't have accepted it if he had thought the 'gift' would be taken back.Good luck with it!

I’d just say no, absolutely disgusting behaviour on there part! I certainly wouldn’t want anything to do with these people.. actions mean more than money! They have shown there true colours towards your eldest child.. I wouldn’t want to run the risk of them souring the relationship towards both siblings and causing resentment in them!

I know of two people who died childless and left their money to their nieces and nephews. Both had sisters who adopted children. These adopted nieces and nephews were left out of the wills. Imagine how vile someone would have to be not to accept adopted children as family members.

That is disgusting. My oldest niece and nephew aren't my brother's bio children but I feel no differently towards them as to their younger sibling. They've been my family for decades now and all will be equally remembered in my will.

Some people really think their genetics are something special.

Why are they even bothered if your eldest may or may not benefit from any of the money?

I find it disgusting that after all this time they don't see your child as either part of the family or one of their own. I would have a serious issue with this and bring THIS up. Especially if they're treating the children differently. If I was in this position, I'd say they either treat them the same, or they don't get to see my kids.

I wouldn't pay back a penny of it, nor do you have to. It was a gift. Sucks for them, but they have no legal right to the money.

I'm a bit shocked at how many posters have expressed understanding of the IL's POV.

Why? Different POVs are good. Do you just want a hive mind?

It seems unlikely they are about to divorce given that they are about to buy a new house and have a child. If they do divorce right now the house won't have been sold so there is no problem.
For all they know, OP may be planning to contribute money towards the next house anyway. Regardless, it really is none of their business.

Blimey. I'm amazed how much this thread has run on and on with barely any further input from the OP. This surely must be a record even for MN.

Not only would I say no but I would call them
Out on this non acceptance of your ds.
I would make it clear you come as a package and they cannot be unfair to one part of the package without risking the whole thing. They sound awful. Don't let ds find out.

Your PIL are awful. I really feel for you. When I married my husband, he had a child from a previous marriage. My parents chose to alter their Will to include my step son as a grandchild, so that he will inherit money from them. We didn't expect them to, but they're beautiful people who wanted my step son to feel part of the family. Good luck with any contact you have with your PIL in the future.

I’d tell them to stuff or demand they ask for the other gifts back for double the amount given too. What horrible people they are.

The truth is that many people feel differently towards blood relatives than 'step' relatives who are not connected in the same way so when it comes to inheritance one day they don't want the op's child fathered by someone who is...not their son to financially benefit. They don't feel as connected to that child as they do their bio grand children and that is how many people feel especially when it is a grandchild. They perhaps think the OP has already separated from one person so could do the same again want do not want their 80k going to someone who is not blood family. I mean it's pretty normal stuff to be honest- the expectation of double is chancing it unless that was there agreement that they had a share in the house like a housing association. If they give 80 k to their child they don't want a 'stranger' to walk off with perhaps half of that 80k if the relationships fails- that is what they are thinking I think and I don't think that is unusual thinking.

And those who agree with the in-laws have no clue of basic inheritance law. Unless a child is adopted it will not inherit if not a biological child whether the parents are married or not! So the kid will not benefit regardless!

But maybe they’d prefer a 9 year old live in a shed so he doesn’t benefit from living in the house?!

The parents are concerned I would say the relationship may not have staying power and the OP may take some of their deposit money when the asset that is the house is divided. Marriages end. The OP has one marriage that has ended so in their eyes the same could happen for their son.

OP has added quite a bit more that I've read including, one a couple of hours prior to yours -including some quite lengthy responses at times. Have you missed them?

“Inheritance tax is a voluntary tax. It is only paid by those that hate their families more than they hate the government”. Not sure who said that but it seems to fit here.