To wonder if my DIL is a gold digger?

[practicalorparanoid]

My son (28) got married recently. His father, who sadly passed away, and I had built a successful business, so there is significant family wealth involved.

As a wedding gift, I bought my son and DIL a lovely 3 bedroom flat in central London (they gave me a shortlist of 3, then we picked out altogether) so they’d never have to worry about housing, but I kept it in my name. My son also works in the family business, but he doesn’t own any shares in it. He earns a perfectly decent salary (around £50k), although the business could obviously afford to pay him much more if we wanted. The company ownership and the wider family assets are all structured so they stay within the bloodline and can’t be lost in the event of a divorce. Hopefully one day they’ll pass to his children.

I’ve genuinely tried to be a good MIL. I have only ever been complimentary to DIL, I don’t give unsolicited advice, and despite technically owning the flat they live in, I’d never dream of letting myself in or turning up unannounced. As far as I’m concerned, it’s their home.

My son was completely on board with all of this. He was happy to sign a prenup because he felt that if someone genuinely loved him, sensible financial protections shouldn’t be an issue.

The problem is that my DIL seems increasingly unhappy with the arrangements. She’s commented that the flat “isn’t really theirs”, questioned why my son doesn’t own shares in the company, and has said that if he had more access to the family money they could have had more domestic help (they already have a cleaner coming once a week), live a more relaxed lifestyle and she’d be able to stop working and become a SAHM once they have children.

That, to me, is where alarm bells start ringing. They’re living rent-free in a beautiful home that I bought for them, my son has a stable career, and they’re comfortable. Yet the focus seems to be on why they don’t have access to more.

I’m not accusing her of anything outright, but it’s hard not to wonder whether she’s more interested in the wealth than in my son when the main complaints are about not having access to assets that were never intended to be marital property in the first place.

I addressed this - possibly it's the son who is not interested in saving for a deposit or taking on a mortgage. Why would he be given it's his family who own the house, so he's not at any risk.

We don't know how much she earns, or whether she has access to joint money.

You sound very controlling OP. Sorry.

Ok given OP's updates I'm slightly changing my mind. OP's view is that she's giving her children a headstart through provision of rent-free housing and employment but otherwise wants the kids to be self-sufficient and cut their cloth according to their own incomes, not expecting they'll necessarily ever get access to any more of the family wealth through becoming joint owners of the business in OP's lifetime or similar. I think that is fine and fair enough so long as it's clear and understood by all, but clearly this son and his wife aren't really following the script. An ordinary marketing manager on £50k with a wife earning slightly less currently, can't or shouldn't really be living a luxury central London lifestyle, having the wife give up work etc - clearly they've built their expectations on the family wealth rather than their own earning capacity. I wouldn't be rushing to blame the wife for that, I think it's likely the son is equally if not more to blame, and potentially OP hasn't helped with all the talk of 'giving' a flat and encouraging them into the central London thing. OP do they live beyond their means in other ways e.g. holidays, gifts etc - would be a bit much if on the one hand you're encouraging them to be financially independent but on the other encouraging them etc to join you on expensive trips...

Either way I think OP needs to have a conversation with her son about exactly what his expectations are, and encourage him to be more financially self-sufficient. Sounds much more sensible if they're thinking of kids that they move to a sensibly sized house further out of the city that they can afford on their own means and purchased in their own names, then the central London flat can be rented or sold and the money invested for their benefit as OP did for her DD. This will make it clear where everyone stands and gives the DD the security she wants.

It doesn’t sound like she is a gold digger but it does sound like being a SAHM is important to her, and she may have naively assumed that it would be something her husband would financially be able to support. She may have also assumed that over time, her husband would become more successful in the company and have greater financial independence from mummy.

I think she is silly to become a SAHM as it sounds like you would ensure she is pretty much screwed and penniless even if she was caring for your grandchildren. However, if it’s important to your son and DIL, and you want a good relationship with them, perhaps start working with your son on how he can progress himself in the company off his own metric and work toward earning a much better salary.

I really REALLY hope if she has children with your son that she is squirrelling away virtually all her salary into her own interests and investments. My guess is she will need it some day.

@practicalorparanoid why would you want them to have to save up for a deposit though when you can clearly afford to buy outright or gift a deposit?

I am no stranger to family wealth and I have to say you sound controlling. In the nicest possible way, could you be trying to cling on to your son and inadvertently be controlling his life as you’ve lost your husband? I don’t mean to be unkind. Just sometimes it’s worth considering our intentions even if it means looking a bit deeper into our actions.

I actually think OP is fair. The son can choose to go and work for anyone else if he wants more money just like every regular person will change jobs if they want more pay. If she feels the rent free flat is not good enough, they’re free to move out and start saving like normal people to buy their own house. No one is forcing anything on anyone. Why should the OP gift her house or part of her business to them, with how vocal she is currently with money, I don’t see what will stop in her 2 years time from divorcing him so she can get half of a wealth she didn’t work for.
How many of your parents gave you a rent free house or a job. We need to leave sentiments aside. She can see everything and it won’t change and She’s free to walk out of the marriage now if it’s not working for her, no one is forcing her.

When and if she does have a child, dont start whining if she favours her own mother/family over yours. What goes around, comes around.

@practicalorparanoid did the DC get anything when their dad died, is that what is covered by the pre-nup?

Did you marry into wealth or the other way round, or is it simply the family business you started that has made this money?

Basically OP, you have found a way of keeping your son under 'your roof' as it were. This is strange and it's about you, not her. They are a married couple but she probably feels that she has no stake in her home, which is psychologically difficult. When women are thinking about children, they have to consider their security and this is not ideal at all. She probably feels like you could pull the rug from under her feet at any moment. You must see this?

Whatever you think of this woman, she would be the mother of your grandchild. An insecure mother can transmit into insecure children. Why would you not want her to feel secure in the knowledge that their home is theirs? Even if they divorced, would you want her living with your grandchild in poor, rented accommodation?

Isn’t the split on divorce also dependent on how long a couple have been together, so if only together a few years the DIL wouldn’t walk away with half. But if they have been married for years it would be shit if she ends up with very little as MIL has controlled it all

I see ops daughter has the same deal and is now a sahm. Thats great for her but she knows she has the security because it’s her mum who owns the house and her bank account the rent goes into.

Should divorce she is still fine.

Ops son and dil need to buy their own place and rent this one out like ops dd. But will the son want too is the question he doesn’t have much to gain and nothing to lose. Dil has everything to lose in the current set up.

A few people have asked what the long-term plan is for the business. The honest answer is that I don’t know yet.
If none of my children are interested in running it, I’d have no problem selling it and dividing the proceeds equally. Equally, if one or two of them are genuinely passionate about it, I’d like them to carry it on, with the others inheriting equivalent value from the rest of the estate so that everyone is treated fairly overall.
At the moment, my eldest DS and youngest DD are the most interested. Eldest DS goes well above what’s expected in his role and genuinely enjoys the business. Youngest DD is only just starting out, so who knows whether she’ll still feel the same in ten years.
The DS this thread is about enjoys his job, but he’s never been the most ambitious of my children. He’s happy where he is, but if he wanted to leave tomorrow I’d support him, and if he wanted to stay there would always be a place for him.

Very odd that you didn't gift the down payment so they could jointly purchase their own residence. Yet you spent 1 million++ on a property for yourself and refer to that as a wedding present.

Honestly, I'm surprised how many posters seem angrier with OP for buying a luxury three bedroom flat in central London and letting her son and DIL live there rent free than if she had given them nothing at all. OP pays for all home improvements and repairs so they have no house maintenance costs either. OP's son and DIL have two salaries and they only need to pay for bills and food. They live near DIL's work so I also presume that she has no travelling costs.

OP has done the same thing for her other children and their spouses who are all happy with the arrangement. One sibling and her DH have bought their own home but the sibling rents out the property that her parents gave her and uses the income to fund her staying at home with her children.

This, plus it will be a lot easier to do so given she is currently living mortgage/rent free.

This is another one of those posts where the OP expects everyone to agree with her and when they don't she doubles down and works to convince everyone that they are wrong and she is right. You DIL is wise.

The law will provide that framework anyway. While a prenup can be taken into account, it can’t override law. As you know, prenups are not legally binding in the U.K.
A friend of mine signed a prenup when she married. They divorced last year, and the judge completely disregarded it on the basis that it left her in a significantly worse financial position than her husband post divorce.

No she sounds like a gold digger.

Buy herself a property that her husband will legally be entitled to take half of, whilst keeping all of his own assets. What a great deal.

@sittingonabeach DH and I built the business together. We started it together, I dipped in and out when the children were small whilst he focused fully on the business, then when our youngest started primary school I worked on the business full time and we ran it together.

each of the children got 80K when their dad died. So not much compared to the value of the business or their dad’s total estate but also not “nothing”.

She's married a guy who won't build anything with her, and who is paid a ridiculous salary for such a wealthy family. She's not part of the family, she's a disposable add-on.

I'm curious about this too. So would you pay if they decided they wanted to have a new kitchen put in, or to change the bathroom or the flooring? I'm guessing yes since you don't want them to have any claim on the property - but would you then want a say in any changes you're paying for? Or are they free to do what they like with it and you'll just pay?

Also, what is the agreement you have with them over damage to the property? Or if you fall out with them? Someone said up above that they'd be free to stay in the property forever if they want - is that legally the case?

I guess it just feels like an odd gift to me - I totally see how generous it could be percieved, but given you had the funds to buy the flat, I'm surprised you didn't gift them a deposit to enable them to buy somewhere of their own instead - it would have cost you a lot less, meant you didn't need to be involved with the ongoing upkeep, and they'd have then fully owned their own property, with just a little help from you as a wedding present. Rather than now needing to save for potentially years to be able to do that. Obviously entirely up to you, but just seems an odd choice, and seems to be more about 'keeping things in the bloodline', including wedding gifts!

Why shouldn’t he?Why is she entitled to a better deal?

I do see how the confusion can arise, finances and family businesses are difficult to understand from the outside - I was in a not totally dissimilar position to the DIL in this scenario before I married now-DH - his parents are wealthy (probably not to the scale of OP but not far off) albeit the vast majority of the capital always was tied up in businesses. It was difficult to understand where exactly DH and his siblings stood as his parents were always very generous with gifts, paying for everything if we are in restaurants or went on trips etc, and they always said the money would be the children's one day, would let children live rent free if they had a suitable empty property in their portfolio (they wouldn't have bought them a flat specifically though, or certainly would have been very, very clear that the property was an investment and would remain in the company ownership).

DH himself is pretty casual about money, comes from never having to worry about paying bills, not spoilt exactly as he's aware how lucky he is and is never obnoxious about it but he just doesn't really get the anxiety and need for grip/control over finances that comes from coming from a much poorer background. When we were discussing our mutual finances when we first lived together/married he was pretty useless about things like setting a reasonable housing budget or investment strategy as his view very much was we should just relax and live a nice lifestyle as we'd always be looked after whereas I had a definite need to know we could afford our house and to look after ourselves even if PILs suddenly lost all their money or unreasonably fell out with us, which probably did result in us living somewhat more frugally than was strictly necessary but DH happily went along with it, he's not into a materialistic lifestyle anyway. I wouldn't have ever pushed to be given more from PILs myself, but if DH had been adamant we buy a more expensive house or give up work or something on the basis of expectations from his parents I probably would have wanted more assurance those expectations were real - does that make me a gold-digger or just sensible? Of course it's possible your DIL does fancy living a nice lifestyle on your money too, but I think if that's the case, given the pre-nup etc she must at the very least have had some encouragement to believe more money was coming, and that must have come from the DS, it can't have been from you and if she's as cynical as all that she'd have made sure of her cash before marriage surely?

This DIL is probably the most at risk. The DD who is SAHM will always be supported by bank of mum. Eldest DS is much more invested in the business and although there is pre-nup the DIL might gain more on divorce. Youngest DD will be supported by mum. The ‘gold digger’ DIL is probably concerned that her DH doesn’t have anything to worry about financially and possibly might have inherited controlling finances in the same way mum is, so if she becomes SAHM and then divorces she knows MIL will do everything in her power to ensure she gets very little