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 do think DIL has some real issues. Free housing: How much would that really cost in London per year. They are free to use their own money how they wish. Does she expect MIL to pay for all their other expenses as well?

The other members of the family who married in how are they Coping with all this largesse?

Yes this DIL is definitely a Gold Digger and OP has her measure.

So when your MiL bought you lunch you were meeting as two women on equal terms. You were not meeting the women who exercised control over your family income and the roof over your head.

From my PoV yours is the deal I would prefer for my own DC, not the arrangement where their roof and security could be removed at a whim by someone not even in the marriage. Less cash but a lot more security and independence.

@C8H10N4O2
I think you’ve filled in rather a lot of gaps with assumptions.
My son isn’t “cruising along on Daddy’s money”. He earns a market salary for the job he does. If he left tomorrow, he’d earn broadly the same elsewhere. Equally, he’s never pretended to be someone driven by money or status. If his wife hoped he’d suddenly become a workaholic after the wedding, that’s a strange expectation to have.
As for “control”, my children are adults. They all chose to sign prenups after taking independent legal advice, and every one of them was free to decline my gift. None of them was obliged to accept it.
And no, I don’t think it’s contradictory to say I’d choose to help someone if, after decades of marriage, they found themselves in genuine difficulty. Choosing to be generous isn’t the same thing as believing someone has an automatic entitlement to assets that pre-date the marriage.

BTW, I’m genuinely pleased that arrangement worked so well for your family. What worked for ours was different. I worked my socks off raising 4 children and, in every spare moment I could, doing admin and helping with the business from home. My husband worked his socks off building it, whilst also being an absolute hero at home after work. It was the hardest either of us has ever worked, and I’m incredibly proud of what we achieved together. Different families make different choices. Ours happened to work very well for us.

But it is gift. It gives them every month rent value. They can move out and rent it out. She could just transfer them every month 4-5k. Better than one time gift IMO. I would be saving money, trying to motivate my husband to do more and invest. Not complain I didn't get more because it is not enough and i have cleaner just once a week.... Especially that one time handouts in long term are never enough for some people, if money are not earnt by you as young person it is very easy to just spent any amount and ask for more.

Then DIL & DS should have simply said, no thanks we don't want you to buy a house for us to live in. DS should seek employment elsewhere if he felt that way. They could have done that.

They are free to do that now.

DIL's issue isn't that OP has given them too much, it's that she wants even more. She doesn't want "less cash but more security and independence". She wants more cash.

Oh come on, they “chose” with you looking over the shoulder.

I’m not making any assumptions about your DS that you haven’t let slip in your own posts - no ambition, wants to spend his money enjoying life and yet its DiL’s fault they haven’t bought their own home.

If, like most wealthier parents, you wanted to help give your children a start in life you could have gifted them the deposit on a home which they would work to themselves. You could have put something in trust as others have done and trusted them to behave like adults with it when they reach the trust maturity age.

You could have raised your son to want to build his own life, not cruise along in Mummy’s property portfolio and in the family business. By your own words he is cruising and not working to improve his own lot.

And of course instead of being concerned about a 28 year old who still wants to spend all his income on holidays and the high life the person at fault has to be the DiL for leading him astray and gold digging. She would be much better off in a more equal relationship where she has some hope of building up a bit of future security rather than potentially spending decades supporting a family which might deign to let her have a few crumbs as if she was a nanny to the nouveau riche.

@Goatsarebest
I’m slightly puzzled by why I shouldn’t be able to make a judgement on where to spend money I have earned. Of course I make a judgement about whether I want to help someone financially. Doesn’t everybody? I make a judgement about whether to give to charity, whether to help a friend who’s had a difficult month, whether to buy eggs or not, what investment I think is best. Don’t you do exactly the same? If a friend asked to borrow money or asked you to pay for lunch, wouldn’t you make a judgement and decide whether to say yes or no? I would hope you have that same sort of control over your own earnings, savings and assets. The fact that it’s my choice doesn’t make it “control” - it makes it my money.

I’m not sure why it suddenly becomes sinister simply because the sums involved are larger. Isn’t it perfectly normal to make a judgement about where your own earnings, savings and assets go? I would have thought that was exactly what financially responsible adults do.

Unless you own your home outright you are at the mercy of someone else - landlord wants to sell, government change housing benefit, lose your job can’t pay your mortgage, global financial crisis mortgage rates go through roof etc etc. Even if you own your home someone could build a massive data centre next to it and make it uninhabitable or it can be compulsory purchased to build hs2 or whatever. Why is everyone so worried about dil who has a job, earns money she doesn’t need to spend on rent or mortgage so can save or invest to help through hard times? I would say relying on your mil for your house and your job is probably slightly less risky than relying on the state or the markets like the rest of us 😁

I wish I earned 50k. And had no mortgage payments to make.
OP would be criticised if she gave her son a higher salary than his job was worth - people would be saying she's created a manchild who has no incentive to strive. But equally she is blamed for not doing this!

I agree they would be better off making their own way if “gifts” come with a ton of strings.

However we don’t know what promises the DS made regarding improving his own lot. She could simply be one of many women who have believed a man when they said they would change after marriage/starting a family. Its a common mistake.

It is utterly disingenuous, verging on the delusional, to imply that a son working for his family business owned by his mother is in any way comparable to a salaried employee working for a company. Those of us who have worked in high pressured roles where you are dealing with calls and business critical issues at late hours in the office will tell you that.

He has the luxury of the familial arrangement that your DIL does not have. Please do not pretend they are the same.

This, amongst the many other ridiculous statements you have made, indicates the level of ignorance and wilful blindness in play.

@Lotus717 the rent would be paid into an account of their choosing - it’s completely theirs to do what they like. If they wanted to pay the rental income to charity, to me, to their joint account or to her personal account, I would be fine with it, as long as the wish came from them jointly.
if they stopped being married, the choice where the income goes becomes solely my son’s and, again, we could change from the joint account to rent being paid to Dog’s Trust, his personal account, my account or our next door neighbour’s account if that’s what my son truly wished!

Exactly. I sincerely hope the DIL has absolutely no plans to give this woman grandchildren. Imagine raising her precious “bloodline” for twenty years while your husband stays comfortably tethered to Mommy’s payroll and property portfolio, only to be told she won't get anything if the marriage falls apart.

She wants grandchildren, a devoted daughter-in-law and complete protection of every family asset while offering the woman doing the actual child-rearing precisely zero security.

People have children for themselves - she's not doing OP a favour by having and raising her own children! She isn't owed financial support from her mil because she wants to be a sahm. If sah is her aim then she needs to take advantage of her rent free situation and save like mad to pay for it. Or save for her own house, rent it out and support her plans with the income. Or DS gets a better job. None of this is OP's responsibility.
No one paid me to be a sahm - I did it and Dh snd I took the financial hit. If I'd been in sil's shoes, I'd be putting away a ton of money that would otherwise have gone on rent, so that I had financial security if the marriage went pear shaped.

I agree completely and think that @practicalorparanoid has been perfectly reasonable about the situation. She could have bought that three-bedroom flat and collected rent on it. By letting them live in it rent-free, it's an ongoing gift of thousands of pounds per month, for as long as they want to stay there.

And the son should earn a market salary for his work in the family firm. Paying him more would cause resentment among the other employees.

For context, I'm an American, so perhaps my cultural view is a bit different. Not a few Brits on MN seem to feel a bit entitled to other people's money.

We've done similar things for our two kids. Both got their university fees and expenses paid in full by us (not a small thing in the U.S.), and we bought each of them a good car when they graduated so that they wouldn't have a car loan to pay. My son is renting a flat, and my daughter just bought a house with her husband. We gave each of them $10k to cover furniture and appliances. The best gift you can give young people is to help them stay out of debt and keep their expenses low. Both of them are active investors, have good jobs, and are building their own wealth.

Well done, OP, and I think you've taken some harsh comments here that are not justified. And I think your DiL expected an easier financial ride after the wedding, which is now rubbing her the wrong way.

It absolutely is a recurring gift of approx £50K a year although OP could have formulated it differently, ie free unconditional tenancy of the property that the couple chose. It’s wild that some PPs here don’t see what a massive advantage the young couple got from OP. Most of the couples in their position without the hand up from MIL will be renting a room in a bedsit in central London. Say DIL earns 35K pa, that gives them a joint income of approx 60K a year which they are free to spend as they wish. They can easily afford a deposit in a couple of years time to buy their own property without spending a penny on their current accommodation, as MIL is happy to pay for renovations and upkeep.

Are we just inventing narratives now?

And what is the issue exactly? That mummy shouldn’t have given him anything, or that mummy hasn’t given him enough? Not only inventing narratives, I see, but struggling to pick one to stick to.

Three out of four of OP’s children are ambitious. so I’m not sure why OP’s wealth and parenting is being blamed for his lack of it. As above, his wife is equally unambitious, and she’s not from wealth.

She hasn’t blamed the DIL. She’s said they both lack ambition, which is apparent. They both have decent and comparable incomes, making a household income of roughly £100k. None of which they have to spend on housing themselves. They have far more opportunity than most to build assets and security.

Not that the DIL is even complaining because she doesn’t own the house and/or lacks assets in her own name. She’s complaining because OP won’t just pay for her to be a SAHM and have the cleaner in more often.

The only thing OP is controlling is her own money. Hers. Not her son’s. Not her DIL’s.

🎯Totally agree with you and @C8H10N4O2 The calculating and transactional nature of this arrangement demonstrates how materialistic OP is, to the point that she has reduced her DIL to the description of a 'gold digger' for raising issues that are relevant to her long term stability and status.

The complete preoccupation with retaining the so called 'bloodline wealth' has eclipsed any compassion and basic humanity. All decisions are driven by her self-interest. And she is upset that the DIL is not playing ball. 🤔🤔🤔

You asked right at the beginning of this (almost 1000 posts ago) if you were being unreasonable to think your DIL might be a gold digger. She may well be - who knows? She's not going to get much though, is she? You're making sure of that. I guess that, when/if they do have children, the bloodline will be secure. Basically she's a brood mare being 'gifted' a luxury stable.
Sorry if that sounds over the top, but I can't honestly see any mention of love, caring or welcoming of her into your family as your son's choice of (hopefully) life partner. She'll always be an outsider. As someone said, umpteen posts ago, a visitor who mustn't get too comfortable.

Fwiw, despite what others have said, I haven't seen anywhere in your posts any sign that she's asked for more. All she's done is, when she was drunk, to express the fact that her home is insecure, unless she regains her independence from her husband (not just Your Son).

Over and out.

After 38 pages I think I am revising my opinion. I think she did not start out as a gold digger but I think you may have created a temporary diva.
Basically she has been able to choose
her perfect wedding with all the trimmings- I imagine lavish- paid for by you
her perfect honeymoon- I imagine luxury- paid for by you
her perfect 3 bed flat in central London fully redecorated to her spec- paid for by you.
Thats really really intoxicating for someone who hasn’t come from money (which you said she hasn’t )and genuinely unimaginable for most people. A taste of luxury experiences where you can buy things without normal financial constraints change your perspective enormously especially as these experiences have been taking place over years not just a one off.
I think she has felt RICH by association and I think now she is aware that she is not rich and they don’t own the flat and the wedding and the honeymoon were transitory events and she has had more of a reality check. That is what came out in the drunken conversation with your DD.
She’ll either calm down and come off the high or get more and more dissatisfied.
its likely if she has previously been level headed and relaxed it will calm down.
There is within the property scheme you have devised enormous opportunities to make savings and future plan and she will start to see that.

Argh it’s 2026 not 1776 - dil cannot be a broodmare in a western country. She doesn’t belong to her dh, she can work, she can save, she can have dc or not have dc. Like 99.999999% of women she is not independently wealthy so if she becomes a sahm there will be financial and earning consequences to that. Her mil being wealthy doesn’t mean she gets to be a well to do sahm because she’d like to be one. No one is entitled to be a sahp unless they’ve earned enough themselves or pay for it or their partner is 100% in. It’s just how it is.

Op already has grandchildren - she says she’s providing free childcare (the absolute string tying bitch that she is), she doesn’t need dil popping them out to be a grandparent.

OP is the materialistic one? The DIL, who already has been provided by OP with a lifestyle she couldn’t otherwise afford, just wants OP to fully fund her so she doesn’t have to bother providing anything at all for herself.

If she wants to be a SAHM with assets in her name then that’s between her and her husband, nothing to do with OP. She and her husband need to work for it themselves. OP has been generous by given them far more opportunity to achieve this than most will ever get.

And again with the ‘bloodline wealth’ dramatics - as if it’s not entirely usual for parents from all tax brackets to pass their assets to their children rather than their children’s spouses. It’s amazing that this is seen as the problem, rather than the DIL’s sense of entitlement to money that’s nothing to do with her.

I understand exactly where your daughter-in-law is coming from.

There is no way I would marry and have children with a man earning £50K in London. I would not feel financially secure, full stop.

I have seen this play out first hand with my best friend and she’s been taken for a ride by her soon to be extra husband. He’s lazy and unmotivated, but knows a huge inheritance is coming his way, she’s the breadwinner, they’re divorcing, she will be left raising the kids as he doesn’t want shared custody, but she can’t get much maintenance from him as his family pay him a low salary and she’s not entitled any of the assets (e.g. holiday homes that have been “gifted” to him, cars, sporting equipment) that he benefits from, as they are all in his mum’s name and he just “borrows them”.

After 15 years and two kids together he’s going to be left living the life Riley while she struggles to raise and house their kids on a single income with no help from him. Your DIL is right to be wary.

But the OP absolutely has not gifted them a house. She is letting them live rent-free in her property. I’d be annoyed if my MIL was going around telling people she’d gifted me a house when she hasn’t. Why does the OP feel the need to overplay her hand?