To feel like my bro’s fiancée is being golddigger-like?

[worriedsstr]

My brother lives abroad and has done for a while. He met his fiancée there, they are getting married, and that is the country they will continue to live in after they get married.

My parents are planning to buy him a flat there. The laws in the country they live in / where the flat will be are such that, broadly speaking, anything you own before marriage isn’t divisible in a divorce, whereas anything bought, earned or gifted after marriage will considered marital property and divided. So, in very simple terms, if my parents buy my brother the flat before he gets married, it would remain his if they were ever to divorce. If they buy it after he gets married, it could potentially become a marital asset and be divided between them.

His fiancée has asked him to wait until they’re married before the flat is bought, because she wants to feel financially secure and wants half of the flat to be hers in the event of a divorce. My brother is completely happy to go along with this, so that’s where the situation currently stands.

I have to admit I’m quite concerned and I find the whole thing bizarre. I completely understand wanting financial security within a marriage, but I struggle with the idea of deliberately waiting until you’re married for a property that is being bought for one spouse by their parents, specifically because that means it could become divisible if they divorce. It’s a gift from HIS (our) parents to their son, it’s not something he has “earned” with her support or they’ve earned as a couple. They haven’t yet been told this but I know my parents will feel exactly the same way.

Maybe I’m looking at it completely the wrong way, but AIBU to think my parents should just buy their son the flat before he gets married, rather than waiting until afterwards when, under the laws of the country they will actually be living in, it could potentially become a marital asset?

Is it the home they will live in as a married couple?
If so and your brother was choosing to have it gifted to him before marriage then, in this scenario, I would think that your brother was deliberately choosing not to be fair to his future wife. Perhaps even scamming her. It works both ways.

In my mind inheritance is shared with spouses. I know I am in the minority on Mumsnet but in the real world, I am normal.

You don't marry someone just because you fancy them. That is what boyfriends are for. You marry someone because of the whole package and that might mean wanting financial security if they decide to go off and sleep with someone else while you are left holding the baby. She is just being sensible. Presumably you want your brother to marry a sensible intelligent woman.

I think she's reasonable. That will be their marital home. If I was her, I wouldn't move into a property that ultimately I would have no claim to. Perhaps she should insist they just try and buy their own instead.

What country is this?

Could there be a contract like a pre nup, so after 10 BJs she gets the ensuite, birth of first child secures the study etc. Make her earn it, you know.

Or perhaps you could marry your brother and keep the high end luxury apartment in the family.

None of your business. Your brother is fine with it.

This is incorrect. In the England/Wales at least the circumstances don’t have to be special to be taken into consideration. Eg. If a couple who both work divorce after a short marriage and there are no children, there’s no presumption of a 50/50 split of pre-marital assets.

Agree with you. If she has no mortgage to pay, she can invest in her own name and build up her own assets.

Exactly. They can change or do things differently after they are married.

Are you so sure the wife will not be contributing in any way? Women usually take on the bulk of housework, not to mention she’ll likely have his children.

In this case, should he be given the house before they wed, I hope that she doesn’t ever lift a finger to maintain it.

Knowing which country this is might sway my opinion.

I would not be purchasing my dc an apartment under these conditions. A practical stranger (to me) expecting to get half of a property I bought for my child is preposterous - and in my circles, opinions on this would be the same.

It is only on mn where I read about how all must be shared, step kids included in inheritance and all money is family money (except for when the op referred to her family's money as family money)

YANBU op, I would like to know which country though, as I wonder if his fiance's attitude and boldness is cultural rather than blatant opportunism.

Yes, they may go on to have children and remain married for decades, which would change things significantly. But, they could split within the year.

I wouldn't be willing to gamble my money in this way, and I suspect those saying she is correct and for the op to butt out, wouldn't gamble their money like this either.

What’s the point in her getting married if there’s no financial security for her?

If your parents insist on buying it before they marry, she’d be better off not marrying at all so that the assets she builds up in lieu of paying a mortgage are protected for her. She’d also be better off not having children.

In fact, she’d probably be better off finding a man who can give her security.

Yes, exactly. The whole point of OP's post is whether the brother gets the flat before or after they get married! If he gets it before then anything she saves/buys/invests in with her income is half his. So he gets a property and a half if they divorce.

I agree with you OP and if I were your parents I’d find a different way to support my son.

You would have entirely different responses if you’d said your brother was your sister and it was a male partner who wanted to wait until marriage for the apartment to be purchased. Mumsnet loves a double standard.

It's very, very unlikely that the man marrying into your fictitious scenario will be doing the cooking, cleaning and child rearing.

If they’re on decent money and depending on the country, they may well
have staff to help with those things.

Either way, caring for your own children doesn’t entitle anyone to half a house paid for by your in laws.

Your parents can stipulate that the purchase can be before marriage. Not having a right to it upon divorce does not mean he would not give her a fair settlement.

If your son was getting married I would hope that you wouldn’t attempt to exclude his wife from ‘help’, that’s a one way ticket to a strained relationship with your DIL (and by association, your son).

I am more concerned about protecting women’s financial security than men’s. Generally, men earn more, men aren’t typically primary care givers to children, men don’t take the financial and career hit associated with children, and men aren’t the vulnerable party on divorce.

I have both a daughter and a son. I would expect my son to ensure that his wife is adequately provided for. I would not seek to ensure that she doesn’t have a home if her marriage breaks down.

In fact, she’d probably be better off finding a man who can give her security.

Or, find a guy who wants to build something with her, as equals.

I think she did find that guy, that is, until the SIL walked into the relationship.

Sorry for disappearing! I hate it when people post asking for advice and then never update, so here’s the latest 😂

My mum spoke to my brother and was absolutely FUMING. We’ve all discussed it, and have come up with a solution together.

His fiancée wanted everything to be 50/50 and divisible in the event of a divorce? Fair enough! 😂 My parents simply won’t buy him a flat anymore. Instead, they’ll buy one in THEIR names, and my brother and his wife will live there (if they want, which they do). Any big financial gifts, help with the wedding, help with kids’ education etc will be structured as loans instead (divisible in the event of divorce in their country). Of course they have the option of not asking for that help… but they would likely need it given the lifestyle they’re likely to want to live and their incomes. She wanted to make sure things are divisible in the event of divorce, and I guess she’s technically got her wish that everything is very equal. The difference is that there would be dividing debt, not assets 💀

Honestly, I think my parents have found a pretty neat solution. She wanted to cash in a little, and I guess she got outsmarted. 😂

I wouldn't marry someone if it entailed living in a flat owned by one of his parents- because I would have no financial stability. You can't expect a wife to give up financial stability because the husbands parents want to ensure you don't get half of the home you live in as a couple if you divorce. So the day you fall out with your husband you are instantly homeless- simply unacceptable.

Thanks for the update. I’d also be chuckling a bit if I were you. The really is though, if they were to divorce with children and had 50/50 custody, your parents would probably ensure she was housed suitably to look after their grandchildren till they went to uni/work.

But what if his parents weren’t able to provide a home for them at all and they started married life renting? Would she have any more financial stability then?

Exactly

I would doubt that.