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.

but the onus is on her and her husband to provide that for themselves

Your point above can only work if SON feels the need to work hard so that his wife is not vulnerable.

At the moment, son is only working with mother to make sure that he is fine.

Therefore, daughter in law needs to figure out for herself, and work doubly hard as everything she earns will be halved if it goes wrong.

And let's face it - nothing about this family suggests that they would say to dil, "ahh look, we have enough, you keep it."

It is not a good situation for dil.

It is for the son and mother.

How much do you spend on birthday and Christmas presents for your children's partners? Or are those also kept in the family?

She’s not vulnerable here. Her husband makes £50k and she’s also employed. Neither of them have to spend any of their wages on rent. They have every opportunity to save and secure assets if they want to.

If she wants more, the only person she needs to take that up with her husband.

If she wants her husband to build assets with her (and not just for her)

Perhaps she has, and realized that her husband does not have the same need as her.

then she needs to take that up with him, not her MIL.

She has not taken it up with her mother in law though? She said something to her friend (her sister in law) who said it to the mil.

Half of which will go to her husband if they do divorce.

“She has not taken it up with her mother in law though? She said something to her friend (her sister in law) who said it to the mil.”

I know. I said that in reply to someone who seems to that this would be OP’s problem.

Yes, marital assets and all that. Would still be significantly more than what she would be walking away with if they did pay rent.

Aren't you already treating her like a gold digger, though?

The flat ownership setup is very odd. The salary you pay your DS is quite low, all things considered. And you clearly are quite wealthy. I'm not surprised she's asking these questions. You come across as tight-fisted and paranoid that she's going to steal from you. Whereas from her perspective, she is probably feeling like you are withholding wealth, and making their lives difficult in the process.

What is the point of family wealth if you aren't going to share it?

Aren't they just living rent-free in his mum's apartment? How can it be theirs when it's in your name?

A friend of mine was the DIL in very much this situation. After the divorce, she and the children pretty well just had the clothes they stood up in – no home, no assets, no child maintenance (and an ex who was not interested in the children). He stayed behind in their (family business-owned) home and lived off his family while declaring zero salary to CMS.

OP has done nothing wrong, but DIL isn't a gold-digger. She's belatedly realised how precarious her position is. If I were her I would be rethinking children, and I would definitely not be giving up my job.

What’s the point of sharing family wealth if it means quickly losing it in divorce? OP and her husband have built a business and wealth to benefit not just themselves, but the generations that follow them. It’s there to be built upon, not wasted.

What OP is done is entirely normal in wealthy families. She’s employing her son, and paying him the same amount she would pay someone else in the same role.

Op is maintaining control over her own wealth that her DIL has no claim on. She’s not withholding anything the DIL is entitled to, and the DIL is not entitled at all to her MIL’s financial support. If the DIL wants security and assets she has been given, by OP, every opportunity to do so.

OP has made their lives incredibly easy by giving them an opportunity that very, very few people will ever get.

Having read through all your replies op, I now understand your reasoning and I think what you've done is very sensible.

What would you do if say…your son had an affair while she’s raising their kids? They divorce. Is it fair that she walks with nothing, losing her home and likely having to move from the area, while your son is completely unaffected and can carry on his life as normal?

You sound a nightmare tbh. This woman is now family or is she just a breeding machine for the future generations who can benefit from the wealth 'your' family have created.

She has been left in an extremely vulnerable position that by the sounds of it even your son doesn't understand. Why don't you just pay him a higher salary as you clearly can afford to and then let them be. Personally I'd never have agreed to this set up and would have run a mile. You can't give a 'gift' with strings attached. If your so wealthy would it have been so bad to gift them both the flat and be happy you can provide your child and the woman he's chosen to be his wife a leg up in life- one that not many get and make their lifes just that bit easier

I didnt say the business wasnt big and profitable. I said that a relatively junior marketing person jn a consumer focused business would not earn mega bucks.

In the event of a divorce they would split any marital assets, which is entirely fair. She would not get a share of OP’s assets, which is also entirely fair.

The gift wasn’t the flat itself. The gift was the opportunity to live rent and mortgage free in a place of their choosing.

In doing so, she has provided them a huge leg up and made their lives very easy. What she hasn’t done, and won’t do, is fully fund them.

The median salary in London is £40000, (average is around £70000-skewed by the extremely high salaries in the financial sector) so for everyone saying £50000 is a terrible salary for London it's really not.
Most people their age would not be living rent free in a large central London flat. They'd be in a one bedder in Tooting dreaming of being able to save enough deposit for a one bedder in Croydon.
The OP has taken an enormous burden away from them by doing this. They have a real opportunity to work hard and build their own nest egg. If people have everything handed to them on a plate where is the motivation to work hard.
She has already started his salary is in line with his current role, why would you pay him more than that. She's also stated he's under no obligation to remain in the family firm - so he's free to go elsewhere.
The job market in London for young professionals is pretty dire at the moment. They have secure housing and a secure wage. I think the OP is extremely generous. I can also totally understand why she wants to ring fence assets she has worked really hard to acquire when 50% of marriages end in divorce.

Whilst (I think) I understand OP's stance and her reasons, I feel for any spouse marrying into this 'empire'. I have known (and dated) similar years ago and it is made very clear you are not family. As a married blow-in of a husband kept repeating whilst heavily in drink one Christmas lunch, 'we are not in-laws, just outlaws'. Whilst on the face of things, it must be lovely having a central London flat with no costs, OP has made it very clear the DIL is not part of this family. From the way OP herself describes her son, he does not seem to have enough about him to do anything to ensure his new family of 2 and maybe more in the future has any financial security at all. Wealth has to be protected at all costs, not sure what for if it is not going back into the business and even a house deposit against the level of wealth OP describes must be ring-fenced.

This reads like a 1980's melodrama and I hope this is someone with far too much time on their hands creating a post about their imaginary life. If not, I hope the DIL gets out before any children are born into this shitshow. It reads like she is just a broodmare to create the next generation needed to pass down the empire.

Yes, not paying rent is obviously nice, but at what cost? Their entire lifestyle depends on staying in his mother’s good graces. Suppose he wanted to leave the family business, move out of London, or even move abroad. Would the “generosity” travel with him, or would the free flat, modest salary and future inheritance suddenly become leverage to keep him exactly where Mom prefers him?

And people keeps saying the wife has it “cushy” as though security and comfort are the same thing. She lives in a valuable property she has no rights to, while her husband works for the person who owns their home and controls much of his financial future. That is not independence; it is a very luxurious leash.

The arrangement only seems wonderfully generous because Mom currently at least somewhat approves of the marriage. Had she genuinely disliked the wife, this thread would look entirely different. The flat was not given to them. They have been permitted to live in it, subject to the continued goodwill of the family matriarch. Lovely wallpaper on the cage, though.

OP has said she would have purchased a property for them to use in whatever location they wanted. Their choice.

The DIL has been given every opportunity to build her own security and assets without the burden of paying rent for a property in a prime location. OP’s daughter was given the same, and she and her husband are making money from renting out the property they were given use of.

Op has given them an incredible starting point from which to build and sustain their own life together. If she wants more, she needs to get it for herself, not expect OP to give it to her.

@InterIgnis, the glaring difference is that DIL has married in and even from OPs posts, the husband (her son) seems to just be coasting along in life, taking his wage and does not seem particularly motivated. OP holds all the strings, however kind and generous it seems. Most people with anything about them would have an issue with this in an equal, married partnership if they have anything about them. Dil's only real choice is to get out if she wants independence- God forbid she brings children into this set-up.

So your son has a 50k salary with no housing costs, What is SHE earning?
They can afford to save and buy their own home if they want to own a home in their names. Or they can save up so she can be a SAHM if she wants to. They should have the ability to put a decent amount in to pensions.

Yes, it does sound like she wanted an easy ride on your coat tails, to have a paid off house just handed over, and a bunch of money to live the lifestyle she wants without having earned any of that money herself.

A woman that wishes OP would just give her more money so she could relax and be a SAHM hardly sounds motivated herself. She’s looking for the exact opposite of independence.

He could be in exactly the same position, comfortable on £50k, without wealthy parents, but with housing costs. As it is, they are both earning a wage without having to worry about housing costs at all, providing them both with plenty of opportunities to save and build their own assets and security if they wish to.

The financial illiteracy on here has been eye-opening. Rent for a nice 3BR flat in Central London could easily be £50k/year, which the young couple would have to pay for with after-tax £. This “trap” is worth considerably more than what either of them make in their jobs, and will continue for many years to come! Anybody suggesting the OP had better gifted them 100k (or even multiples thereof) for a deposit is mistaken.
Oh, but in this “golden cage” they don’t build up any equity? If that is their priority, they can rent the nice 3BR, adding an additional income stream to DS’ and DIL’s, and buy a 1BR in Tooting or, perhaps, even Croydon.
Ah, but DS has no motivation to save and change the status quo? Presumably, DIL has known DS for a bit before marrying him and talked about what they both want in life, any lack of motivation shouldn’t come as a complete surprise.
In any case, DIL is much better off compared to marrying Joe from Derby without any family wealth. Compared to the vast family estate, she - and DS, at least for the moment - only got a very small portion, perhaps that’s what many posters object to?