"Gift" from In-Laws

[Anonymous]

Don't take that money. Even if you do and you never ever divorce, it's something that they'll have over you - my ILs offered to and did give us school tuition for our kids for a few years, and then they constantly criticized everything else we did with OUR money. You can't win. We paid them back and we don't take their money anymore.

Your ILS stink, btw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me, if it was the difference between a home and being priced out, I might consider it. I have been in this situation several times with my in laws. Not very nice. Their expectations were immense. But so is the cost of private school. Then when they died [/b](thank you God!) [b]the inheritance was his to keep under State law, unless it was co-mingled. many sleepless nights over that. Worked out fine for me in the end, however. We have been married 30 years.

May your children in-law speak as kindly of you as you have about your in-laws. You seem very happy to take their money....

+1 Sorry PP but your post sounds very cold.

[Anonymous]

Wow, I have a better money in-law rant.

My SIL was gifted a home free and clean from her in-laws. This home is well worth about a million in LI NY.

Now I would never live in LI NY but still.

She bitches to this day that her MIL never updated the kitchen before they moved in and called her MIL cheap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, I have a better money in-law rant.

My SIL was gifted a home free and clean from her in-laws. This home is well worth about a million in LI NY.

Now I would never live in LI NY but still.

She bitches to this day that her MIL never updated the kitchen before they moved in and called her MIL cheap.

Her in-laws gave her the house or her and your brother?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me, if it was the difference between a home and being priced out, I might consider it. I have been in this situation several times with my in laws. Not very nice. Their expectations were immense. But so is the cost of private school. Then when they died [/b](thank you God!) [b]the inheritance was his to keep under State law, unless it was co-mingled. many sleepless nights over that. Worked out fine for me in the end, however. We have been married 30 years.

May your children in-law speak as kindly of you as you have about your in-laws. You seem very happy to take their money....

+1 Sorry PP but your post sounds very cold.

Interesting. As it turns out, not only did I not take the money, but I still have not "taken the money" ...the inheritance belongs to my husband. But whatever, OP, think hard before you say yes to this proposition. I thought the in laws demands were so far beyond the pale as to come close to ending the marriage. It was only after they died that I understood the pressure that they put on our marriage. Would I do it again? No. And again, I did not accept their money. If I behaved the way they did, I would expect my children in law to have better sense and RUN!

[Anonymous]

...further, I had the very odd experience of saying no! no! no! so many times during our marriage. How odd to have so many opportunities to say no to money!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:...further, I had the very odd experience of saying no! no! no! so many times during our marriage. How odd to have so many opportunities to say no to money!

If the money is enriching your household now, you took it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. Once you're married they can't demand anything.

I would take the money but it needs to come without strings.

I am a daughter in law and understand the OP may be annoyed with the strings attached. But after getting older and wiser and seeing more divorces around me, I now understand the OP's parents better. I was annoyed as heck that what my parents had gifted to my brother when he bought a house went to the SIL after their divorce (that was caused by and mostly her fault, and only after 3 years of marriage).

I would take the offer, OP. That money would be nice, as you say. You really can't blame the parents that they want the money to go to their son and not you if you stop being their extended family member.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't believe how many people are upset about this. It makes perfect sense and shouldn't be considered insulting. I'd be insulted if my DIL got her panties in a wad over this. It's his family's money - they want it to stay in the family. And it implies you think there's a chance you'll split. I mean, if you're SO sure you'll stay together forever, take the money, sign their agreement and live happily ever after.

And In the case of divorce, what's the big deal? They give you $50k for a down payment on a $500,000 house. in 5 years, you guys split, the house is worth $800,000 - you sell the house you get $350, he gets $450. Seriously, why get so bent out of shape over this?

+1
If OP doesn't think divorce is a possibility, even remote, then what's the big deal.

[Anonymous]

Sorry if this has been said, as I didn't read everything, but why not agree in the event of a divorce, the money would go into a trust for kids? It's a win-win for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't believe how many people are upset about this. It makes perfect sense and shouldn't be considered insulting. I'd be insulted if my DIL got her panties in a wad over this. It's his family's money - they want it to stay in the family. And it implies you think there's a chance you'll split. I mean, if you're SO sure you'll stay together forever, take the money, sign their agreement and live happily ever after.

And In the case of divorce, what's the big deal? They give you $50k for a down payment on a $500,000 house. in 5 years, you guys split, the house is worth $800,000 - you sell the house you get $350, he gets $450. Seriously, why get so bent out of shape over this?

+1
If OP doesn't think divorce is a possibility, even remote, then what's the big deal.

The big deal is that it is insulting to the OP.

Suppose the OP gave the ILs a Christmas gift this year with one condition: that she inherit it back after they die. Maybe every time she gives them a gift birthdays/Christmas, she would remind the ILs that one day - after they die- that gift would be her's again. Would that be rude, insensitive, completely out of line? Or just a matter of practicality - after all, the ILs are older than the OP and they are probably going to die before she does...so she might as well stake her claim now and she might as well give them stuff that she wants back.

[Anonymous]

The tone of it is ugly. It does not bode well for future relations with the in laws.
Call me what you will, but for 50K, there is no way I would agree to that, but for $4M I probably would. Not in the position of turning down $4M, so I can't say for certain if I would be tempted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't believe how many people are upset about this. It makes perfect sense and shouldn't be considered insulting. I'd be insulted if my DIL got her panties in a wad over this. It's his family's money - they want it to stay in the family. And it implies you think there's a chance you'll split. I mean, if you're SO sure you'll stay together forever, take the money, sign their agreement and live happily ever after.

And In the case of divorce, what's the big deal? They give you $50k for a down payment on a $500,000 house. in 5 years, you guys split, the house is worth $800,000 - you sell the house you get $350, he gets $450. Seriously, why get so bent out of shape over this?

+1
If OP doesn't think divorce is a possibility, even remote, then what's the big deal.

The big deal is that it is insulting to the OP.

Suppose the OP gave the ILs a Christmas gift this year with one condition: that she inherit it back after they die. Maybe every time she gives them a gift birthdays/Christmas, she would remind the ILs that one day - after they die- that gift would be her's again. Would that be rude, insensitive, completely out of line? Or just a matter of practicality - after all, the ILs are older than the OP and they are probably going to die before she does...so she might as well stake her claim now and she might as well give them stuff that she wants back.

We actually had this happen. Very ugly at a time when one person is mourning and the other is greedy. Hurtful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't believe how many people are upset about this. It makes perfect sense and shouldn't be considered insulting. I'd be insulted if my DIL got her panties in a wad over this. It's his family's money - they want it to stay in the family. And it implies you think there's a chance you'll split. I mean, if you're SO sure you'll stay together forever, take the money, sign their agreement and live happily ever after.

And In the case of divorce, what's the big deal? They give you $50k for a down payment on a $500,000 house. in 5 years, you guys split, the house is worth $800,000 - you sell the house you get $350, he gets $450. Seriously, why get so bent out of shape over this?

+1
If OP doesn't think divorce is a possibility, even remote, then what's the big deal.

The big deal is that it is insulting to the OP.

Suppose the OP gave the ILs a Christmas gift this year with one condition: that she inherit it back after they die. Maybe every time she gives them a gift birthdays/Christmas, she would remind the ILs that one day - after they die- that gift would be her's again. Would that be rude, insensitive, completely out of line? Or just a matter of practicality - after all, the ILs are older than the OP and they are probably going to die before she does...so she might as well stake her claim now and she might as well give them stuff that she wants back.

We actually had this happen. Very ugly at a time when one person is mourning and the other is greedy. Hurtful.

Yes, hurtful. Marginalizing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The tone of it is ugly. It does not bode well for future relations with the in laws.
Call me what you will, but for 50K, there is no way I would agree to that, but for $4M I probably would. Not in the position of turning down $4M, so I can't say for certain if I would be tempted.

Exactly my thoughts.