Stepchild wants to see finances and money spent on his stepsiblings.

[Greenhairedmonstor]

My late FiL who I never met, left school at 15, fell into the right crowd while he was doing a labouring job and ended up with a little empire.

There is something in place that is not quite a trust. It allows SiL to choose to live frugally without working, and has enabled my husband and his brothers an income which supplements their incomes.

Their children will benefit after their parents’ deaths when whatever is in place will be dissolved.

My husband has his own business as well.

My stepchild is 18 and will go to university next month. I also have another stepchild who is 13.

The eldest has asked that now that they are an adult that they want to look at my husband’s finances. Essentially they want an account of any money that is spent on my children and they wanted my husband’s estate to be reimbursed from my share of the house when he dies.

Now Mumsnet always asks, no I was not the other woman, my ex meets more than his share of his financial responsibilities and I also work and rent out a house that I own in my home country that I will eventually return to. Husband’s ex is comfortable and I don’t believe this has come from her.

Inevitably my husband subsidises our life.

This has been a bitter blow to my husband and he doesn’t see how his relationship with his child(ren) will recover.

Agreed, except I’d say there’s a big but when it comes to step families. I think it really matters that children are made to feel that they are a priority over dad’s second relationship.

Could your DH educate his children about the financial situation by using third partys (accountant and lawyer) in a meeting?

The kids could be afraid due to ignorance.
Your DH should kindly address that.

There is nothing to lose by informing the SC especially when they will be having to manage an inheritance wisely.

It's certainly a lot more complicated when it comes to blended families, but I do feel the strength of entitlement to their parent's wealth from AC on here, can shock me at times.

It's not ideal, but millions of people do just that, and it would be pretty mean and selfish to not be kind and generous to your own stepchildren?

Their dad could spend all his money on cocaine, casinos and hookers and it’d be none of their business.

The SS isn’t asking about the trust, he’s asking about the money his DF spends on your children. Rightly or wrongly he’s deeply resentful about the way your children are funded and wants confirmation that he and his sibling will be treated fairly.

Possibly you mentioned the trust to show that he and his sibling/cousins would eventually receive an inheritance of their own, but it’s irrelevant to this issue. That gift is from their grandfather.

Your SS is saying that as your DH’s son, he isn’t getting a fair share of your DH’s generosity. Is he right?

So, your dh gets a share of the income from assets that will eventually be inherited by next generation?

In which case, he can spend his income however he likes.

It sounds like stepchild doesnt know/understand how the will was set up, and hasnt the maturity to understand that he is being grabby. Could he by given a copy of the will and an explanation? Maybe told if he wants to consult a lawyer he is free to do so, but he must pay legal fees himself.

So what. He's his son's bio child, of course he should be getting all that.

it's not really a second family - the children concerned are the OPs but not the father's. Assuming I've read that correctly. That's the issue - supporting children financially with some big expenditure when they are not his children. You can see how that might grate.

I am mystified by all the comments about the father intending to cut off the son. OP hasn't suggested that, Her posts sound more like the father is worried his son will cut HIM off or that their 'relationship will never be the same'.

The two extreme choices appear to be

1. say no, son is angry, this will have a negative impact on their relationship, maybe son cuts him off.
2. allow son access to finances (presumably for the rest of husbands life!!) so son can keep a running total for OP to pay back. This will also have a negative impact on their relationship.

It's a lose/lose situation really.

Maybe there is more to this, and I've had a quick look at the wedding thread. Behaviour wasn't awful, they didn't force him to move, but it was a bit off. It wasn't the stepsons problem to sort out. I don't understand how they know OPs husband paid for the ski trip. Really that should have happened quietly behind the scenes if it had to happen.

The child told them at the wedding when he moved seats. They should never have asked him to move, it’s not up to him to sort out OP’s children whom she could easily have left with their dad. Stuff like only causes resentment.

Kind and generous is a nice birthday present. Paying for a ski trip is parental level support. Op says her ex pays his way and she works. These kids have two parents to support them.

Yes it’s a nice thing to do but DH doesn’t exist in a bubble, he has two children of his own to support and prioritise.

You don’t know what level of support the husband provides. There is simply not enough information.

the idea that an 18 year old should be able to audit their parents finances and bill a surviving spouse for monies owed is absurd.

nobody spends ALL their money on their own children - I certainly don’t. That doesn’t mean my children go without or that they are not well provided for. I’m entitled to some privacy.

He sounds loaded, I'm sure he can afford it.

People are missing these key facts:

OP’s children are step siblings not half siblings. There is no blood relationship with her DH, or his children.

The SS has not mentioned the “trust”. The OP has added this for context.

The OP has said she intends returning to her home country, suggesting she expects her DH to pre decease her. She may be his main beneficiary if he does.

The OP does have an ex who contributes towards their children.

Adding these together, you can see why the SS is unhappy to see his father spending money on the OP’s children and he wants to know to what extent that will affect his and his sibling’s inheritance from their father.

I know he hasn’t any actual rights to his father’s money, but surely you can see where he’s coming from.

Nowhere does it say that because OP’s child had a ski trip paid for, that the 2 son’s have gone without.
You also don’t know that the OP’s husband hasn’t been “loyal” to his own children? Finding them through schooling and uni to me sounds like private school was probably paid for, along with which there will have been countless ski trips and other extra curriculars.

some children feel a great deal of entitlement to their parent’s money and some children don’t like it when they think that money is getting spent in a way that doesn’t benefit them.

I can’t tell whether he is or not. He does seems fairly well off. If I married a man better of than me & my ex and moved my two kids in to a nice house, went on lovely holidays paid for by him etc I’d feel self conscious about what his kids made of it. Which might be a factor.

This kid is extremely lucky in that he has a guaranteed inheritance in his future. That's very unusual, because most of us won't know whether we get one or not, due to the possibility of care costs using it up. But this not-a- trust is a definite, so he's not reliant on his dad not needing care or whatever else might eat up his dad's capital.

He's being horribly grabby, considering that his dad pays for him to go on expensive holidays and meets all his needs.

OP and her ex had saved hard for her son's trip, but couldn't quite reach the amount required. They didn't expect DH to pay for it, but he thoughtfully made up the difference. Considering how many people complain that step children aren't treated like family, I don't see why OP is being spoken about as if she's a gold digger.

Where does it say he has funded them through school and university (bearing in mind 17yo hasn’t started uni yet)? OP says dad will support him at uni but that doesn’t necessarily mean paying for everything and no need for loans. Most parents have to provide some form of financial support, most parents don’t pay tuition fees and all accommodation etc costs

That is kind and generous - to you. For some people, kind and generous is different things.

I went to private school on a bursary and had a friend’s dad offer to cover the cost of a ski trip if I wanted to go - that is also kind and generous. It wasn’t at the cost of his own children having or doing anything they wanted.

no where does it say that the ski trip was paid for at the expense of his own children missing out on anything they wanted.

Funding children through uni doesn’t necessarily mean “no loan” or paying for everything. it can mean covering rent, bills, giving them an allowance.

That’s what I am saying. I haven’t seen anywhere in OP’s posts saying SS is being completely bankrolled through uni by his dad (apologies if I have missed that).

That’s not the point though, is it?

The son resents seeing his father treat someone else’s children in a way that most would consider parental, to the extent that he’s shoehorned them into family events they weren’t even invited to, and paid for ski trips.

The idea that step and bio children should be treated the same may be nice in theory, but in reality can be quite damaging.

See, I don’t really. It would be one thing if the expenditure meant the partners children going without. But there’s no suggestion of that. I just don’t think it’s ok to be totting up what parents spend their disposable income on and expecting it back in some way. This young man has a guaranteed inheritance. But he’s now effectively asking for his dad’s portion too. And that isn’t ok.

I once had a friend who was from a very well off background. Parents divorced, father went on to meet someone and remarry years later to a woman who had a child and my friend was very angry that this boy would get anything from her father. She would actually say it was her inheritance. It was deeply entitled and unpleasant and we ended up drifting apart because I felt it showed a side of her which was really unpleasant.

There is no confirmation that he paid for the ski trip.
The question was asked.
For all we know he contributed to it without paying for it in its entirety.

The Dad doesn't appear to be on deaths door. Presumably he could live for decades and then require a great deal of paid for care. There is no inheritance as yet.

Planning on invoicing any surviving spouse (if that is indeed the Op, who knows) seems premature.