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.

Yes... but then it's so much easier to call the kid a spoilt scrote than to accept as parents we have profound responsibilities - that go waaaay beyond just financial.

Arguably his actual children should matter more to the DH than his stepchildren. If being ‘lovely’ to his stepchildren hurts his children, then it isn’t ’lovely’.

OP’s DH really doesn’t have the luxury of just dismissing his child’s feelings if he wants to have a good relationship, or have a relationship, with him.

Is it reasonable then that OP's DH needs to keep a spreadsheet of every single penny spent on the shared home with OP and her kids in order to maintain a relationship with his son then? And show it to the son on a monthly basis to ensure that the step-kids haven't had any extras? Where does it end? Can he get a contract written up that his dad's income is to only fund the very very bare necessities of the household bills? Therefore, if OP wants her children to live off food other than Pot Noodles, she needs to ensure that this is fully funded by herself and that the husband's income hasn't contributed to it? If his dad has bought one of the step-kids a McDonald's, does that need adding the the amount that the DS needs reimbursing?

I'm not saying OP's husband shouldn't sit down with the son and discuss, but the son's demands are utterly ludicrous.

Wanting to know the ins and outs of finances when it comes to shared marital income and spending is different to knowing about a trust fund (or whatever it is) which they will benefit from. The first is unreasonable. The second is reasonable.

The SS needs the latter explained (or explained again) to him and the difference made clear. Then I think your husband should ask him what it’s really about and where this is coming from - and make clear what is and isn’t acceptable.

I also think you’ve done yourself and a disservice describing your child’s trip as something their step father has funded.

I’m not saying that the son is entitled to his father’s financial records, or that the request is justified. He isn’t, and it isn’t.

What I’m saying is that DH should probably stop doing things like asking for invites for his stepchildren when they explicitly haven’t been invited, and paying for school trips. His son is seeing this as his father treating stepchildren as if they’re his own children, and he’s hurt by it.

The grandchild is definitely not going without why do you think that? There is nothing on Ops posts to suggest that rather the contrary.
The income was the assets are for the OPs husband and his siblings go spend any way they wish and the OPs husband has his own income that has nothing to do with his father. He can give it all away if he wants. Spending some of his income on his stepchildren isn't taking anything away from the step son he and his cousin will eventually inherit the assets from the grandfather. OPs husband and his siblings can't touch that.

Exactly.

Wanting to know the ins and outs of finances when it comes to shared marital income and spending is different to knowing about a trust fund (or whatever it is) which they will benefit from. The first is unreasonable. The second is reasonable.

I think, though. the problem is that in the DSS' eyes, those two things have become merged, such that he is seeing his step-siblings benefitting from a lifestyle which his grandfather's fortune has fed into.

I agree that the DH needs to sit down and set out the parameters of what the DSS has secured for him by his grandfather, and to differentiate that. And also take the opportunity to admit that blending has brought new tensions and actually ask his son how he feels this new blended family has worked for him, perhaps then trying to address any areas that have caused hurt or a sense of rejection or dislocation.

It strikes me the money has been chosen as a way of raising other issues.

I don’t get why people don’t get it. It’s has nothing to do with people entitled in general, or other gifts to friends or whatever.

It’s not simple as oh well as long as DS gets support from his father it’s none of his business what his father does after that. He is his father and he’s living with two other kids. SS is going to have some negative feelings about that

i was very lucky to have two extremely devoted parents and I am a devoted parent. I think we underestimate how big it is to have your dad playing dad to other kids while you are growing up

Where no new children were going to be created it probably would have been better for OP and the dad to not get married. Much easier for inheritance purposes to keep assets separate then.

Christ, mine would have gone ballistic if I'd ever asked about them!

The last time I knew how much my father earned, I was about 10 years old and it was £2,500pa. That was a decent salary in 1965...

He's a cheeky fecker - no way should your DH countenance this - his money is his to do with what he chooses. At best SS should be informed how the almost trust might operate following your DH's death. Other than that he should be told that by DH that he doesn't intend to provide any insight into his foamces until he is 75+. He should also be reminded that nothing at that stage should be taken for granted as care needs etc will be a moving target.

i was very lucky to have two extremely devoted parents and I am a devoted parent. I think we underestimate how big it is to have your dad playing dad to other kids while you are growing up

I am never sure if they don't understand or defensiveness precludes them from accepting this.

But either way, it is perfectly natural for the DSS to have some negative feelings - probably bigger feelings than he fully understands - around this, and to then dismiss him as a grabby scrote is just beyond my comprehension.

His behaviour cannot be sensibly isolated from his family situation. This is, it would seem, the second thread (at least) OP has started complaining about him. Different if she were seeking advice as to how to help him, but instead she is seeking validation that he needs slapping down and putting in his place. That doesn't speak of a healthy dynamic for this boy to me - and I can see why he might resent her dining out on Grandad's estate because I bet his grandfather would not have liked to see these threads about his grandson, exposing him to the denigration that has been inflicted on him on this thread.

But children going off to university do need to know their parents income if they are applying for student finance.

Morally OP your dh is in a very poor situation if the deal was he got the profits of the business his DCs inherited with the understanding he would spend that money on them. I’d say half of that money should go to dss1 for funding uni and other half in savings for his dc2 (or go in boosted maintenance to his ex), and you and your dh live off your joint income. Not the income from the business the various grandchildren own.

I actually think where there are second marriages/long term relationships it is good idea to talk to existing DC, especially when they become adults, about finances. DH and his siblings knew that stepdad only had life interest in the house when he married MIL. He had come to the marriage with nothing. No other children. He died first so didn't end up being an issue

And ok maybe DH decides this isn't how he wants to spend it, but the abuse directed at the boy for at least questioning it is OTT.

We don't know exactly the terms of the trust. but it isn't uncommon for trusts to specify a purpose for the distributions, especially in discretionary trusts.

ETA I struggle to believe the settlor's intention was to fund his son to fund OP and her dc. So, yes, there is a moral element to this, even if it slips through the legal technicalities on the wording.

Yet we know intergenerational wealth is almost a sine qua non nowadays in order to get you pretty much anywhere.

Sickening that an first-marriage child has to suck it up and be labelled as entitled for not wanting DSC getting free skiing trips instead of him.

Honestly second families are so distorted.

What if the DH's own children are 'hurt' by their father being anything less than actively hostile towards OP's children?

What if no amount of normal, kind behaviour is OK with them?

It sounds as if the DH's eldest wants to ensure OP and her children do not benefit in ANY way from being with his Father - and that simply isn't possible, he's married to their mother, he lives with them, they share the same roof, same food, same heating and lighting and transport..

The level of invention and fiction on this thread is incredible - another PP has confidently stated the deceased FIL absolutely wanted the income from this trust to benefit his grandchildren exclusively - but they have NO idea if that is actually the case!

Perhaps he wanted his offspring to have an assured income for life, and assets to pass to children.

Perhaps he wanted his offspring to have enough to gamble on the gee-gees or keep a mistress - we do not know.

What we DO know is he did NOT put the assets into a trust to pay the income directly to the Grandchildren... by-passing the parents. So it is safe to assume he was happy with his children spending this income as they see fit. Which is what OP's husband is doing!

The op mum sounds like an usurper to me.

In what way? She works, she earns, she has property that she receives the rental for, she pays her way as far as she can, and she normally pays for her child. Her DH turns out to earn more and have a larger or better located house than OP can afford. But she's shown no signs of taking anything for granted, or being a gold digger.

I still think that there are some responses like this the one I quoted above, that wouldn't have been made if OP hadn't said that she's from another country. It might be that SS's attitude is also built on that fact.

And the bit about the "rights and well-being of the parents" in the context of a dad who has moved on as he wished and is spending the money as he wished. Yet even being questioned is somehow an unbearable affront to his "wellbeing."

Honestly ... the distortion ...

Yes, let's defend the op by making it xenophobic.

Nothing about the fact she has posted looking to elicit negativity about the DSS ...

Why doesn't she pay for her own child's skiing trip then?
Also why would she mingle in the finances of her DH? (Money that is not hers or her children's, but still she feels entitled to as it subsidies her way of living).

"But children going off to university do need to know their parents income if they are applying for student finance."

You're mistaken. For the purposes of the maintenance grant the Student Loans Company quite clearly says:

"If your parents are separated or divorced, we’ll use the income of whichever parent you’re financially dependent on, including the income of your parent’s partner, if they have one. This means we will not need income details from the parent that you’re not dependent on or have less contact with."

It is the income of the ex-wife (including any child maintenance etc) and that of any partner that the ex-wife is living with that is counted.

I presume that the DSS is living with the ex-wife.

"Also why would she mingle in the finances of her DH?"

Are you really asking this question?

Why? Well, that is a very normal thing indeed for married couples to do. In order to pay bills and spend money on things (such as holidays etc).