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.

Oh even better. He’s got all the assets so she loses all round.

Oh I doubt he’d be hammered for CMS. Mummy will ‘fire’ him and pay him in another way. In the case of a divorce the DIL won’t see a penny in CMS if they have children.

@Haikuing what utter bollocks. My DP’s gifted me property and a share portfolio. My DH therefore had the advantage of not having to pay for a hulking great mortgage or rent in the centre of London when he moved in with me. We have a pre nup that ringfences both those in the case of divorce even now with 3 kids. We have had a great advantage and built up a fortune between us because of it (that’s not ringfenced). In addition, i am doing the same for my DC and would expect that to be ringfenced too.

Well she start by saving for a deposit on buying her own place.
Not many people get this luxury.

But it won’t go to him. It will go back to mummy and she will “gift” him a nice salary while the DIL gets nothing. The DIL is in such a precarious position.

Well it seems popular to have fathers doing the 50/50 care on divorce on here so why not in this case? Because if she has them all the time they might be cash cows

You haven’t quoted me so I’m not sure what is utter bollocks.

But your situation is clearly very different to the OP’s set up, so it’s actually not relevant.

Are you divorced with kids? 50/50 is mainly done with parents who live close by or an easy commute from each other. If she was forced to move out of area 50/50 wouldn't work would it despite being best for the kids.

To protect the son and her own money in case of divorce. That is entirely reasonable

You should have another blunt and fair conversation with them both. If they do not want the flat then there would not be accusations of financial coercion. Would DS be expected to find another employer by his DW as well?

Sounds like DIL wants the cake served her way only.

What about DIL saves her money and builds assets for her future?
Rent or mortgage can take up so much of your salary.
Imagine if they saved and invested this.
They can do very well if they use this opportunity.

£50k is a v low salary for central London in what I assume is a fairly senior role within the business. I do think she is valid in her concerns but it's something she should discuss with her husband, and for them to deal with, rather than for her to be annoyed at OP for. For example, the son could move roles to get something better paid, so they could save up for their own property. I wouldn't want to marry a man who was financially dependent on his parents but presumably she knew all this when she married him.

And I hope they do. But that doesn’t take away from the fact that the OP is financially controlling her children.

OP are you planning on making any provisions for any GC which may come along from your DS and DIL?

I've been a single parent through my kids childhood. And done 50/50 care with my youngest virtually since birth

She lives in london. I'm sure she can rent a place in a less desirable area and travel like other divorced parents have to. Or dad can pick up kids from her.

I see it as an opportunity rather than a control.
So many young couples would bite off your hand for such an opportunity and not see it as being 'controlled'.

The phrase 'giving her grandchildren' isn't directly interchangable with the phrase 'having a baby'. Saying someone is 'having a baby' is a neutral fact. Saying someone is 'giving her grandchildren' is a loaded term that implies that the pregnant woman is doing the grandparent a huge favour for which they should be grateful.

It’s not different. This is what they could achieve should they both put their minds to it but instead people seem to think OP should bankroll them.

What is a cheaper area of London anyone can afford as a single parent these days. Anyway it's not the point. It makes it a difficult situation, knowing if she leaves she will get no support.

I don’t think the OP should bankroll them. I just don’t believe in giving “gifts” with strings attached.

And it is very different: ringfencing assets prior to marriage is one thing, ringfencing them post marriage is gross.

A breeding on at that!! Happy for her to have the grandkids but not half of the flat?

Which she knew when she got married

Which now she is starting to realise and is obviously unhappy which OP doesn't seem to understand.

OP doesn’t understand why the DIL seems to think it’s up to OP to provide more financial support.

If the DIL is unhappy and wants more money then that’s between her and her husband.

@Haikuing I quoted you because it’s not true that the MIL wants her money to go to the Dogs home as such. She just doesn’t see any reason to bankroll her son’s ex partner in the case of a divorce. And it’s no different. These assets may be in my name but they will never go to my husband in the case of a divorce. He had exactly the same advantage as the OP’s DiL. She just wants to be bankrolled.