Father-in-law wants to gift my husband a house – in my husband's name only

[esgill]

My husband's parents have been undergoing a painful divorce for the past five years, arguing via their lawyers about the financial terms.

Now, my father-in-law contacted my husband to say he wants to give him money to buy a house – on the condition it's only in his name. My husband argued over this – but his dad basically said his way or the highway. He says it's not about trust but what else is it – I guess he's disillusioned after five years of legal battles.

Our question: how enforceable is this, actually? His father is abroad, in another continent. We're married, without a pre-nuptial agreement (though we got married abroad, I wonder if we'd need to do anything to legalise it here?

Otherwise, my husband said we could change the contrast so it's in both of our names. (is that easy to do?)

We have a young daughter and I have no intention of leaving my husband unless he does something insane like cheat on me. We've been together now for 10 years and know each other for a further four when we were friends. But I want security, for me and my daughter.

I’d be ok with it being in the husbands name as I can understand why the FIL wants to give the money to his own flesh and blood. Think of the money you will save by not paying rent. I would not want to contribute to repairs or maintenance to the house though. You will be massively benefitting from the FIL generosity too.
I think the suggestion that a lot of posters have made to lie to the FIL is awful and really dishonest. What sort of low life would lie to their own father when the father is giving them hundreds of thousands of pounds. That’s really shitty behaviour. If the OPs husband doesn’t want the house then he can decline.

If FIL keeps the house in his name, and lets his son live there, the house belongs to FIL. Until he passes away (assuming he’ll leave the house to his son in his will), you won’t have a claim on it.

if FIL outs the house in your DH name, then yes it’s a marital asset.

I don’t think he’s a twat at all. If I were parting with enough money to buy a house, I’d most certainly be putting it into trust for my son and granddaughter. Rather than risk losing 50% of it in the case of divorce (such as his own). It wouldn’t occur to me not to.

It's a monetary gift so it will be in my husband's name.

It's not a lie – people are simply pointing out that he doesn't understand property law nor marital law. You can't have your cake and eat it – be married and also enjoy the 'privileges' of not being married. FIL never proposed a pre-nup and actively encouraged us to marry. It's unkind excluding your daughter-in-law from this. Especially as we've been together for so long.

Legally it becomes a joint asset. It doesn’t matter that it’s in his name only. Fret not!

Well good thing he is not you and it seems he is not putting it in a trust then!

I see nothing wrong with what he’s doing other than the risk that you get half in the event of divorce. I too would be putting it in trust. If my in laws made it possible for us to not pay rent/mortgage I’d be thrilled not ungrateful. As others have said, use your rent money for investments in your name.

I’m always torn on these issues because I’m in a similar situation. I get that a parent would want to protect their offspring in the possibility of a divorce, but I often wonder how they would feel if their spouses parents did the same thing.

I know my FIL would never ever let MIL be in the position of not being named. The arrangement was odd at the time and made out like it protected me (it’s a “loan” to DH that will never be paid back)

it’s a tricky one. I figure we’ll work it out, and I also don’t doubt my in laws would leave me stranded if anything happened to DH. But we have teens, and there would be no family unit without me.

til then I’ll enjoy my rent free life, them paying for repairs upgrades (and utilities!)

You have a mistrusting, scarcity mindset, my husband and I do not.

I think this mistrust is a pretty horrible part of capitalist culture we have inherited because the thing is, once you are family, you are family. I'm not a disposable incubator. I am the mother of his granddaughter. I have known my husband for half of my life and we are obviously in it for the long haul and happy. Why get married if you want an arrangement like this? Two conflicting philosophies.

Thanks for the reassurance!

@MNHQ doesn't exist.
To contact them you need to report your own OP with whatever your query is.

If it's not recognised here then just get married. How much is he giving him. Is it enough to buy a house outright or just start you off.

You may feel differently when your child is married/has a partner.

I had two very good friends, whose marriage seemed absolutely solid. They were really decent people (I thought) who'd been together for 25 years, when the wife's grandmother gave her a house.
Less than a year later, the husband left her and claimed and got, half of the gifted house.

My son in law is a really nice chap. But I still decided to give a planned gift of money to my daughter before they got married, rather than after, so that it would count as money brought into the marriage.

Have you had the marriage certificate translated? You may need to if you need to use it officially here in the UK. I think you need to pay an official translator though.

MIL once told me she was changing her will to put her estate in trust until DH & SIL retired so 'greedy spouses couldn't get their hands on her money'. It was purely a reaction because SIL's DH had just left, then come back & MIL didn't trust he would stay. The reason I didn't care was DH sees everything as joint assets.

In the end, DH & SIL will get very little as FIL remarried after MIL died & most has/will go to new his DW. So take it while it's on offer, check your marriage is valid. In 12 months get your name added to the title. You have DH on your side, so don't let your FIL's situation become an issue in your marriage.

We've already decided to loan, not gift deposits for houses, or set DC up without education debt instead, as everything else here is joint if you're living together, even if not married. We've sacrificed a lot to be able to save & I don't want someone else's child walking away with half of it. A loan ensures we get it back in case of a split & can help our DC out again.

Is your father in law trying to lower the assets so he doesn’t have to split them with his ex wife I.e. your MIL

and is he allowed to basically try to hide assets during a divorce by signing it over

and is your husband ok with screwing his mother over as well?

It’s coming out of my husband’s inheritance from his dad. His mother is on board. Why so quick to presume dodgy dealings? We aren’t happy tbh with his dad because he cheated on his mum — created his own problem.

Yes we got it professionally translated! It did work for the home office here so hopefully that's proof it's valid.

Mmm I know what you mean but I don't think that will be us -- and I also don't want to raise my daughter to be so wary of trusting people. A little wariness is healthy. Too much is detrimental to community and connection. Especially if she'd been with someone for years, I would trust her judgement. Life is uncertain. Things happen. But marriage is a commitment towards love, not a transaction IMO.

You dont have a house at the moment, so having a house in dh name is more security for your family. If you split dh should keep his share (ie the value now, split any increase in value). As this is not likely then it doesnt matter too much.

Use the saving in rent/mortgage to save some money for your own security.

No I don’t. I know that I have no idea what might go on inside a marriage and that I would want to protect assets originating from me for my grandchildren.

IANAL but as far as I know, in Scotland it would also be a matrimonial asset, as it would be their matrimonial home. And it was given to them after their marriage.

In Scotland , if the husband had been given it before marriage AND they didn’t move into it but, say, rented it out and he kept the rental income separate , then he might have an arguement that it was a pre marriage asset.

And if they divorce a short time after they move into the house, no doubt his solicitor would try to argue that the wife should only get a share of the increased value during the marriage. But who knows what the court would accept.

Perhoas the Pp is thinking of inheritances , which are not matrimonial assets in Scotland ( as long as you don’t bring them into the marriage ).

I think you’re fretting over nothing. Our last two houses were in DH’s name only. We even had a rental in DH’s name only and for tax purposes he was allowed to give me 50% of the income in rent. You’re married, that’s your financial security, no need to cause a fuss over this.