Who's unreasonable? House renting, children - complicated!

[Houseone818]

I own another house to the one myself and DH live in and own together. It was my grandparents house and was left in trust for me. I inherited this before me and H married and it is very much my house and all protected etc etc.

Currently this house is rented out and my plan has always been that eventually when my DC has grown up, I will sell it and give the proceeds (or the majority at least) to them to give them a step up, the house is currently in a trust for DC in case anything happens to me but it still gives me full control / ability to sell etc.. DH knows this.

Me and DH also own a house together that we bought during our relationship and is the family home. Here there is me, DH, our child and my stepchildren, DHs older sons. The children are all too young currently for this to even be an issue right now but a hypothetical conversation stirred up a bit of a tiff between me and H last night.

Basically we were talking generally about young ones these days and how hard it can be and we got onto the conversation of wondering how long kids in general will end up living at home for nowadays (SC currently here about 30% of the week). DH then said well we could always let SC rent the other house when they want to move out and how nice it is to have a house there that means we can offer a home to the children at a lower cost and so on... for context SS's are 15 and 17 and our child is only 5 so it's obviously more likely to be SC living independently quite some time before our child.

Essentially I said well no? That house was already rented and it is there for benefit of DC, not to he used at a cheaper rate for SC, didn't say it quite so bluntly but that was the gist that basically it was DCs house, not a "family" house and that until DC needed it to either live in or sell for the proceeds it would be rented as normal.

This got a bit heated, but there are a few reasons I wouldn't be open to this suggestion and the main one is I think it's a slippery slope. So say we offered it to SC, bearing in mind still this is all entirely hypothetical, but say we did, and they or one of them lives there for many years paying minimal rent, I don't believe that it wouldn't begin to feel like a "shared" house, like we either had to continue to let whoever it were live there and not give it to DC as planned or we'd have to share the proceeds. I just think it opens it up to getting messy and I'd rather keep it simple and separate. It's DCs future, not a family house that can just be used by whoever.

I've suggested in the past that DH start thinking about putting together some sort of savings or whatever for SDC, he could as the money isn't the problem, but he never has.

If we imagine your rental property rents out for £1000 each month and so brings in £12k each year.
Then let's imagine your step children rent it for £400 each month - an amount you decide covers insurance, repairs, maintenance. That adds up to £4,800 and £7200 less than renting at market rate.

What would annoy me is that your step children's dad is no worse off for them getting a leg up with housing, their mum is no worse off. It is only you/your child that is worse off.

You would be better to say, for example, that if their father and mother would like to subsidise their rent when they move out you would match what they put in (if you want to help them) up to a maximum that you are comfortable with - maybe £100 or £200 each month. So for example then mum, dad and you paying £200 each towards their rent rather than you paying (by losing rental income) the full £600.

I often think this when people own a holiday property/caravan and a wide circle of family/friends/neighbours/colleagues think that they should be able to rent it for free or very cheap. You wouldn't go giving a cousin or neighbour a grand so why would you give them a week in your property in August that would rent for £1200 for £200? It reminds me of this because I don't think that they would ask you to pay to subsidise your step children's property to the tune of £600 each month while mum and dad paid nothing but the loss in your income is the same £600.

Personally I think help your step children as presumably you care about them as children of your household but also expect their mum and dad to help them. The rental house is a distraction and an easy way out for their mum and dad to look to you while not having to do anything themselves.

I just wish all this 'help the kids' was a thing when I left home! 😅

If you agree you'll resent him for making you feel like you had to. Any damage, late rent, unpaid bills, parties, angry neighbours...all the things youngsters will likely do, will just exacerbate the resentment. He might resent you temporarily when you say no, but then it's old news.

Like a PP said, if it was cash in the bank or jewellery, it wouldn't be a thing. Your grandparents left it to you, to benefit your children.

Some step parents split their estate between their step and bio children, some don’t. I’m splitting mine equally between them all because my step children have been in my life for over twenty years, but I know people who have decided to only look after their bio kids. It’s up to you and everyone feels differently, so it’s no one else’s place to tell you what to do, so don’t be railroaded.

He should be setting up savings for all his children if he can afford to (along with you for your joint child). His ex should be too.