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.

She really hasn’t, I can assure you. Everything she’s done is entirely standard for wealthy families. The ones who don’t do as she has are the outliers, ime.

But what if the son has a different perspective. He may idolise his wife now and think all that buying a home of their own is pointless. This does sound like the DIL jumped into a decision (because of naivety, desperation to get married and have a family if she is herself 28 also, and seeing the offer being to good to be true without realising it actually is for only one of them and it ain’t her). I feel bad for her because if this was my daughter I would tell her to not accept. I would be all over that prenup with a separate solicitor not funded by them. I feel she’s been shafted

Try reading the posts by the OP when she says another one of her children does this. They rent out her property to support a SAHP whilst enjoying living in their own home.

“I would be all over that prenup with a separate solicitor not funded by them.“

As prenup 101, that’s precisely what did happen.

You’re infantilizing an adult woman here. She made her choices.

I can’t imagine tying everything up so much that a gift is never truly a gift, especially if you are sitting on so much wealth

How much would OP miss if she had truly gifted them a deposit for a flat, and not expected it back.

I bet many people with middling wealth who have some disposable income to help a couple onto the property ladder won’t be as controlling over the money as OP is. Maybe, that is why she is so wealthy!

But the dil and the son aren’t entitled to anything at all. A flat to live in with no costs is worth 1000s and op has gifted them all that money they are earning themselves. Why should she gift her dc or their partners money or property?

I’m not from money so I’m confused why people feel entitled to the money their partner’s parents have earned and it’s mean and cruel not to have access to it - it’s not theirs to have. Op is enabling son and dil to keep 100% of their earnings to spend as they see fit other than day to day bills, that isn’t a position most people ever get into. Or did everyone else except me get gifted a property or a substantial deposit?😅

Yes, OP has the audacity to control her own money. How dreadful.

I can’t imagine being so entitled to think someone else needs to straight up give you a house because you married their child. I can’t imagine not appreciating the level of freedom and opportunity we were given, but instead whining that I wasn’t fully funded. ‘I married into a wealthy family, what do you mean that I still have to put work in?!’. That mentality blows my mind.

So what that OP can afford it? Doesn’t mean they have to do it, or that they should be expected to.

I don't see any problem with these arrangements. They seem perfectly fair. The flat is equivalent to a Tied Cottage/House only with better terms and conditions for the married couple. The main difference is that if the couple divorce MIL keeps ownership of the flat. The advantage is that if they don't wish to live there they can rent it out and keep that money.

I don’t think you’re paying him enough for that!

@TheDisguiseOfReasonableness
I’m not quite sure what you’re asking to be honest. If they’d just said no thanks, we don’t want such a generous gift, then that would have been absolutely fine. I certainly wouldn’t have forced a property on them. I’d have bought them a normal wedding present like most parents do. The only reason I was able to be so generous is because I could structure it in a way that protected the family assets.
Equally, I never said it had to be a flat in London or that they had to live in it. The offer was basically a property budget. If they’d wanted a holiday flat in Marbella to Airbnb or a rental property somewhere else in the UK, then that was also an option. So far 3 out of 3 children have chosen for the present to be somewhere they live in (at least at the start, DD and DSIL now rent theirs out).

If what they wanted was for me to hand over a property worth £X in joint names, then no, I wouldn’t have done that. That rather defeats the whole point of why I structured it the way I did in the first place.

Neither you nor I can possibly know what the son's perspective is so it doesn't really help to invent stuff.

If the DIL was my daughter then I'd strongly be recommending that she and her husband put the considerable amount of money they're saving from being able to live in a free house and investing that in another property.

He is welcome to get a job outside the family business!

"How much would OP miss if she had truly gifted them a deposit for a flat, and not expected it back."

They would still have to pay the mortgage every month. As it is, they pay absolutely nothing for mortgage monthly, and in addition the son was given a free £80k inheritance.

I would bet my house (which I paid for myself) that he got free university and accommodation too and is in no debt.

If he earns 50k and she earns significantly less. How much would the banks lend them realistically? Regardless of the £80k deposit. To live in close proximity to their lives may mean it’s impossible to buy. That they may have to move out of London all together to live somewhere decent and affordable. Which makes having children with a network to help harder. Because expensive houses also come with big costs. My council tax is over a £1k a month for example. The son has had it to easy, in his mind he has been gifted a flat because he has. It’s his regardless of the situation of their relationship. She is a position where she loses regardless. She can demand they save for a house but that puts her plans of motherhood on the back burner and potentially means moving from her network, he can say no to that aswell and she either has to stay or leave. He gets a broken heart at worst. But I do think she if she’s having buyers remorse and trying to get herself a better deal then I don’t really blame her. The MIL has been generous to a point, but it’s also an unfair gift as only one truly benefits

I agree with your last point, but the OP said she gifted them a flat. She didn't; she bought one (as an investment?) for them to live him. Ok, that allows them to keep all their (self-earned!) income which means they are better off than most. But is it generous to make that 'generous wedding gift' a means to keep the money in the bloodline?
I don't think so and I doubt the DIL does either, even if it took her a while to realise that.
My MIL sold her rented out property at a reduced price to us when we married. No mention was ever made of bloodlines. But then I was and am a member of the family and the mother of her grandchildren.

Does the DIL not also have a job? Have we gone back a hundred years to when only the man's income is important?

I think you mean "I don't think he earns enough for that". He's not a baby he can get a better job if he's capable and wants a different income.

DIL also works. And they pay no rent. And have the option of renting out a 3-bed flat in central London (£60-100k per annum prob).

Do you genuinely think they couldn't get a mortgage on that? Don't forget he also got £80k inheritance. And presumably has a good credit history because somehow I imagine he's not fallen into debt educating himself etc.

You have been very generous, but you’ve given 0 if things change. Which is what you chose - you can’t pretend you’re not prioritising cash above all.

DIL’s the only person in your family without any money.

She’s the poor relation. She’s better off earning and buying a bolthole well before you get any grandchildren.

It’s like a plot of a Barbara Taylor Bradford book. I’m imagining the op as some type of Joan Collins in Dynasty 🤣

Tell me how years of free accommodation in Central London is "zero"?

@practicalorparanoid I think that the issue might not be the money itself but that the way you structure your ‘family’ ‘finances makes your dil feel like she’s not a valued member of your family.
You can be as lovely as you like….. but if she’s not included in the real workings of the family then she will always feel like an outsider.
Look at it from her point of view, she probably feels like you’ll never trust her.

Literally who earns less than 50k a year and also expects to build up assets in central London so they can be a sahm? This is fascinating. If dil was paying rent to mil I’d understand but she isn’t so the money she doesn’t need to pay she can spend as she sees fit, perhaps on a buy to let somewhere cheaper. Maybe if she wants more money she should be getting a better paid job herself. I cannot imagine expecting your partner’s family to give you a house

Sorry if this has already been said (as it’s such a boring cliche thing to say on Mumsnet threads) but I wonder what the responses would be if the sexes were reversed. What if it was a young guy with a lowish paid job who wanted a share of his wife’s family money. I know what the answers would be.

Posters are talking about the DIL as though she is an idiot and not had any control over what she has chosen to do.

Where did you get that she "earns significantly less"? OP said that her son "earns more than she does".

She could be on 45,000pa. Which would mean they could probably borrow 250-350k. Plus 80k inheritance, plus say a year of saving their combined salaries given that they're living rent free. More than enough to buy a small place in London. Then they rent out the free flat OP gave them (for say 60k/annum) & they have their own property, and a large passive income stream easily covering the mortgage.

If she's earning much less, say 25,000 then she's even luckier than she's landed up with luxurious central london accommodation on a wage where most people would struggle to rent in Derby!

I agree with this. You treat her as an outsider, you call her a gold digger, when she is doing what most sensible women do - make sure they are covered in the event of a split.

You want to control your children and you use money to do it. If you are happy for them to live rent free, you should be happy if they choose to have one partner stay at home with children. Otherwise, you are controlling them.