To expect Sunday Dinner as the agreement?

[TipJarTroubadours]

Small details changed but the short of it is:

1. We allow people to stay in self contained accommodation for 'free'
2. The only 'cost' is attendance to Sunday dinner
3. Aibu to refuse to let someone stay (or charge them market rent) if they don't attend dinner

The long of it is

DH and I own a residential static caravan site. It has been in DH family a long time. It has great transport links to a major city.

We allow close family/friends to stay rent free whilst they attend uni in the city/start a new job. We have had 15 different people over the years, some for six months, the longest five years.

Currently house DS and nephew who are both at uni and DHs best friends daughter and her partner who has just started an apprenticeship. All four attend Sunday dinner, as have the 15 beforehand.

(For those that are interested, I cook the meal and then they take turns to make/buy a pudding and wash up (most goes in the dishwasher) I have had one with severe allergies who used to bring their own food, and one that was fussy so I used to make them beans on toast every Sunday. )

My sister's son has been living with us since September, I was very clear on the rules- it might seem odd but for a 10k saving a year I expect attendance at one meal a week.- they both knew about this.
Since starting he has attended one, preferring to go to the pub/gym/game on a Sunday. It has been raised with him and we have said if he doesn't attend then we will charge him rent (we have other uni students renting although they are all mature)

I have gone to my parents for half term and have just met my sister and told her the same. My parents and her think I am completely unreasonable to ask him to attend Sunday dinner, I think they are completely unreasonable to expect me to house him for free after agreeing to my rules ( there are costs involved for me, utilities etc plus not being able to rent it out)

I've said he has to attend tomorrow or I will bill them from now until Christmas and if it isn't paid will evict at Christmas.

Am I being unreasonable to expect my nephew to do what he agreed to in return for accommodation? (I don't think I am, even if expecting to attend dinner is unreasonable, he has agreed to the terms, he could have just rented halls)

This place absolutely baffles me at times.

If someone is letting you live on their property completely for free (and in doing so is actually losing income) then the least you can do is turn up for dinner once a week if that’s what they ask you to do.

and I am absolutely CERTAIN that if the nephew had posted and asked if he was being unreasonable to not go, he’d get ripped to bits.

If he/ his parents don’t like it, they can pay market rate can’t they.

And more than that, they were told in advance and they agreed.

OP, YANBU.

They were comparing rape to dinner… they were drawing parallels to the coercive arrangement that exists in both examples.

This is what makes me think there's no way the OP's family could charge market rent for the caravans they dish out for a once a week dinner.

Residential caravans are generally not too much cheaper than a small flat.

So they'll be able to kick him out, but they'll have to find another desperate person to take his place.

It’s nothing like that.

I'm sure it would be different, but most replies might be along the lines of "Just humour the mad old bat if you want to keep the free accommodation."

Yes this.

You din’t come across well OP. Do you struggle to make genuine friendships?

I think this agreement sounds crackers! I’d have been mortified to be forced to sit through every single Sunday dinner with my weird aunty, her in laws and another bunch of randoms, instead of going to the pub with my pals at that age.

YANBU

I agree with @ExcitingRicotta , and also don’t understand all the negative comments you are getting. Your DN sounds very entitled.

This sums up my thoughts. I dont think it's that weird - I've stayed with people under similar circumstances in the past. It creates an opportunity to foster a genuine connection and feeling of communality rather than being just convenience for the benefiting party.

Asking for mate's rates without bringing anything positive to the giving party is cheeky

There are such things in business as unfair contract terms where the more powerful party creates a clause so unreasonable it can be automatically void due to the disadvantageous situation it puts the weaker party in

It's exactly like that. Did you miss the bit where OP said she's providing their accommodation for free?
If they don't want a free weekly dinner on top, they could always pay their own way like the rest of us, and have freedom from the obligation. They've chosen this. They should fulfill their side of the agreement. Basic manners.

I get the value of a family meal. With small children. You make it a pleasure and a ritual, which hopefully they'll carry on with in their adult lives (including with friends, who can often be more 'family' than actual family).

Not compelling adults who may, as adults, have other things to do on a Sunday evening like preparing for the week ahead. I know that's how I spend my Sunday evenings.

You don’t foster good relationships by forcing adults to dance to your tune and metaphorically chain them to the dinner table. You foster strong relationships by being kind, generous and open so that people enjoy spending time with you and actively enjoy your company. Not by acting like a jailer. You have a really fucked up view of relationships if you think that how normal relationships should involve threats and coercion.

People are arguing with your terms here, but honestly, you're giving them a GREAT deal, which they agreed to. If they're not holding up their end of the agreement then go to the plan B that you established--to charge them rent instead. It's really very little to ask. If they weren't interested in that part, they should have said so at the outset, instead of just using you for free rent AND utilities!

No. Because in a superior, thinking family that was trying to foster relationships and connections, Sunday dinner would be an invitation, not an obligation. Big difference.

edited for typo

Your house you’re rules. It’s a very simple condition for a very generous “price”. I hope they bring you flowers/wine/chocolates as well…

Well done you for this family effort, not only a free dinner, but exceedingly generous of you and your DH on the accommodation side.

However this young person does not want to stick to his end of the agreement (which was agreed to freely). As an adult you get to choose, but you also get to pay for your choices. He sounds spoilt and his mother is allowing him (encouraging him?) to take advantage of his aunt's generosity by not sticking to the terms of the quirky but nevertheless generous offer.

I was lucky as a uni leaver to be able to rent a small (very outdated) flat from family aquaintances for a peppercorn rent and keeping an eye on the place during a 6 month temp job in London. I cleaned the place up and made small improvements. I also saved the place from major water damage when the upstairs flat had a bad leak. I would never ever have told them that I was not going to stick to my side of the bargain and expect to still live there.

It’s not a genuine connection if you’re being strong armed into it. Quite the opposite.

I think this would have been my approach in the nephew's position. As a poor student, free accommodation would be very hard to turn down. I'd resent every minute of the enforced dinner. Inviting him to pop round for meal from time to time is one thing. Forced attendance is completely different.

No, they are offering. He's not forced to accept their offer, in any way, shape or form.

It’s weird. Just ask him to mow the lawn, the sort of rational thing an aunt would ask of her student age nephew in exchange of free rent. I have never in my life come across a situation where an older person is forcing a younger person to eat dinner with them or else.

You're missing that the key to people's reactions to this is the "compelled" part.

An OFFER of a family meal (with stipulations if they attend, like pudding) is lovely and what most people would do. Likewise, a transaction that includes work in kind (for example, doing the gardening, a task) is completely fair and reasonable and most people would see it as such.

Compelling other adults, especially family members to socialise in exactly the way you demand is not reasonable. It's weird and controlling and smacks of "I think people should behave THIS way". Ugh. As someone who left an abusive relationship with a partner, this smacks of coercion and control.

@Gair "As an adult you get to choose, but you also get to pay for your choices."

Spot on!

Actually I’m curious to know if when DH’s family owned and managed the plot they forced their tenants to come to dinner or if this is your particular stipulation OP.

The fact you married into this business makes it even stranger than you’re so intent on forcing your relatives to attend or pay up. You’re only there by chance of marriage yourself.

Unless you think the aunt has a greater obligation to house her nephew than his own parents do then there is nothing coercive about it. OP set out her expectations to her nephew before he moved in, he agreed to the terms, he was not forced in to the caravan at gun point. He can move out anytime he likes. If he does not want to attend a once a week family dinner he can pay rent to OP or someone else. If he wants to benefit from family he can participate in family.

Anyone else reneging on an agreement like this would be called a cheeky fucker.