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.

"A long long time" to save for a deposit? Son got £80k inheritance, they both have jobs, let's say £50k & £40? per year, and they are currently living rent free.

They could rent a one bed in zone 4 for two years paid for with his earnings alone, pocket the £50-100k/annum rental income from the 3 bed central London flat, and have £200k deposit in 2 years.

How many people can do that? I know a load of lawyers and doctors around that age who could never dream of such a cushty life!

As for why I didn’t just give them a deposit instead, that’s because a deposit becomes part of a jointly owned marital asset. That defeats the purpose of trying to keep family wealth within the family You keep banging on about "family wealth". Are your future grandchildren not family? Do you expect your son to not see his wife as his family? Did your husband not regard you as family?
This all sounds very strange.

DIL is allowed to speak with her husband warts and all. He should not be passing along (tattling) information to his mum.

Since there is a pre-nup there is no actual issue as the money stays. They are allowed as a couple to discuss their day to day arrangements and desires for their own lives.

It sounds intense and a lot of pressure to act and be a a certain way to be accepted.

Lucky I married a pauper and we built our own wealth!

I’m acknowledging what has actually been said, rather than inventing a scenario that best suits a preferred narrative.

They live rent free in central London. Both are employed and in an excellent position to save for and obtain their own assets and security.

@sweetiepie11 He didn't pass it to OP. The DIL made multiple comments to OP and also to OPs daughter about how she wants more money. Apparently despite having gone through the prenup process where (trust me) she will have received very clear advice about what she can and can't have of OPs money.

Indeed. OP doesn't seem particularly bothered about whether her son works there (and TBH he doesn't sound like the employee of the week) nor does she care where they live. Where are people getting all this from??

In all honesty, DIL is right. Why did you put the house in your name only? Do you not trust your son? She is right to be questioning it

I have a friend who has a similar set up. Wealthy from the family business, all that jazz. His parents bought him the house in his name only and his wife is not on the property however the wife is entitled to a vast amount of money as per their prenup agreement if they were to divorce to give her some security.

There’s nothing wrong with that set up if it’s agreed upon by both parties. That isn’t what makes her a gold digger. What suggests the mentality of one is her thinking she should have greater access to OP’s assets in order to fund it.

If she wants to be a SAHM, it’s up to her and her husband to create the conditions to make this possible. It is not OP’s responsibility.

All great that you’ve been nice to her, but the message has been sent via your actions. She’s not part of your family & never will be, I would be regretting my decisions if I were her to be honest.

She’s part of OP’s family as an in law, dependent on her relationship with OP’s son. She would cease to be family in the event of a divorce, and OP quite understandably doesn’t want her walking away with a share of OP’s family wealth.

That, to me, is where alarm bells start ringing. They’re living rent-free in a beautiful home that I bought for them

You’re fucking joking aren’t you? 🤣🤣

Why on earth would you GIFT them a flat as a wedding present if you didn’t want them to live rent free?

You’ve put them in an awkward and vulnerable position and seem very controlling. I bet her family has a lot to say about the pre-nup. Also, If you can afford to pay your son more then pay him more! He’s your son!

Just thinking about it, what happens if your son and you die - would she continue to be able to live in the house you’ve bought them? What if they have kids and suddenly find themselves homeless as the house is in your name only?

But all of "they could do this&that" depends on HIM wanting to do it! The set up is such that he definitely doesn't need to (she does).
He can live in his luxe flat, spend his pocket money every month and still be set for life.

As I said,been there, done that and it was extremely unsettling. I even got my partner as far as agreeing to pool money for a deposit on a doer-upper, we went and viewed houses, chose the one (omg, I was over the moon), spoke to banks and then he went and bought a 7k fridge-freezer.... Because he wanted to and he could.

I'd never have anything with him.

I think most people, including me agree with you.

Where people seem to differ is: If she wants to be a SAHM, it’s up to her and her husband to create the conditions to make this possible.

As the husband has his needs met by the mother, the usual motivation to earn more is not there.

This. Unbearably controlling.

Having lots of money doesn’t give you the right to be in charge of other people op. Give presents with love and no strings to your family. Or you are going to cause issues. it’s not rocket science.

Yup.

Then the issue is the choice of husband, not the lack of OP's generosity.

YANBU.

I think that if someone isn’t brought up in similar affluent circumstances with family money and/or businesses, they probably are a bit glamorised by the wealth, and start to get a bit avaricious.

I don’t suppose she doesn’t love your son, but she’s a bit dazzled maybe by the current reality of their lives, if she’s not used to affluence?

But keep your own counsel on this. Don’t risk alienating your DS. You sound like a perfect MiL. Her dissatisfaction with her husband’s earnings are for them to sort out. Surely, she’s earning as well, so their household income is more than 50k, of course.

And with no rent to pay, a combined salary of 70 to 80,000 even in London, that is a comfortable life.

Maybe just let her settle.

Marrying someone whose parents have lots of money doesn’t mean that the Dil is entitled to it either. If they want children and for her to be a SAHM then they are going to have to work it out and not expect OP to fund it like everyone else does.

I would hate to live in a property owned by my MIL and have my DH being kept on a fixed wage because my MIL had it in mind that's a good idea. But what I'd be doing is encouraging my DHc to get a job somewhere else, and for us to get our own house. Would that make you happier?

OP and her older children had exactly the same arrangement as her younger son and they were all happy with it. It probably wouldn't be fair to her other children if she treats the youngest differently and more generously.

It also seems to be a test of the character of the husbands/wives of her children. It doesn't sound like the spouses of her older children have complained about their housing situation in the same way that DIL has. The arrangement is very unusual and wouldn't be something that I would ever do in that situation. It's like the F. Scott Fitzgerald quotation 'Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me.'

OP's son also has an inheritance of £80k which he could use for a deposit on a home in a much cheaper part of London. They could then rent out the luxury 3-bedroom apartment in central London for a pretty large amount of money that they could use to pay their mortgage.

Maybe OP's DIL's parents could also help them with monetary contribution.

I really understand you giving him the flat etc. But maybe he needs to find his own way a bit. Is he in a position to earn a higher up position and wage in the company for example. His set up within the company and in your house seems like it's an extension of living at home tbh.

I just think people probably thrive when they are under some pressure to look after themselves.

@Junaluma
Yes, I do trust my son. I also recognise that divorces happen and they’re not always because both people are equally to blame. Someone can cheat, change their mind or simply turn out not to be the person you thought they were. Sensible financial planning isn’t a judgement on anyone’s character.

@Btowngirl
of course she’s family to me while she’s married to my son. If they divorced, she wouldn’t be my DIL anymore. I’m not planning to remarry, so while the properties remain in my name there’s effectively no divorce risk at all. If I ever wanted to help an ex-DIL after that, I could always choose to do so. That’s very different from giving away ownership now.

Dil is not entitled to a free flat in London because she married a man whose mother is wealthy. That’s all there is to it. If he’s unambitious and won’t try to earn enough to support her to be a sahm then she is in the same position as most women in the country. If she doesn’t want to live in this ‘gilded cage’ she can move out and go and pay market rent somewhere else. This isn’t Victorian times - they can’t lock her in an attic.

I am assuming a three bed flat in a nice part of London cost about a million pounds - who’s handing out that kind of money to family members because they would quite like not to work? I guess all the mils who disagree with op are working hard to fund sahm dils who have been hoodwinked into marrying their unambitious sons?

@practicalorparanoid ,

You have a very black and white view of this.

From what I can understand of your posts, you are wealthy (buying a 3 bed flat in central London without worrying too much), so several million at least.

On that basis, if you gave them 0.5 million (say) for a deposit or share of something jointly owned, it wouldn’t really affect your position too much.

The reality is that, if it is a short child-free marriage, both parties are normally pretty much restored to their original position.

And, if they had a long marriage including children, you may lose a portion (not all) of the 500k, and that would be going towards your grand children.

i am sure that, in business, you take risk to make money. I would look at that like an investment. If things go well, you will embed more of your family in the business and it will grow faster. And, if they don’t, you have made a poor investment, but can easily afford to write it off.

(Also, it is funny how nearly everyone on this thread sees property as a sure fire investment. Over the last 12 years, prime central London flats have dropped 20% nominally and 40% inflation adjusted, and there is no reason to believe that trend will change given government policy).