Dear Prudence, Two elderly relatives of mine can no longer afford their mortgage. Social Security isn’t enough to pay their bills. I have offered to purchase a house in my city or to purchase the house they currently live in rather than pay rent at a retirement community. They would get a house, and after they die I’ll have property I can sell or keep. The problem is their son, who lives with them. While he is also having financial difficulties, his are more self-inflicted and he has an entitlement complex. I’ve pretty much decided that if I do buy the relatives’ house, I will kick him out. But his parents are torn about that option. On one hand, they know that he needs to pull his life back together himself. On the other hand, they don’t want to be responsible for him ending up homeless. Do you have any advice or thoughts on this one?
—Housing Crisis
I answered a similar question just recently, and it astonishes me to what degree people think offering a substantial financial gift entitles them to tell the recipients how to run their lives. I agree that this guy sounds unpleasant, and it probably would be better for all involved if he were to move out on his own and start developing financial and practical independence from his parents. But if you make this offer conditional on your relatives’ kicking their son out of the house, you’re going to provoke unnecessary distress and conflict (and frankly, even having made this proposition is manipulative and just plain awful). Absolutely talk to them about the best way to get their son to develop independence. Encourage them to kick him out, even. But for the love of mercy, don’t make it a condition of their being able to stay in their own home during their last years on earth.
It's not really a gift when you start attaching conditions and dictating terms. So, if you want to set yourself up to miserable, then go ahead and say the son can't stay. And, of course, in reality, he might move out, but in short order will move back in. Not sure if the OP plans to charge them rent or not. But, either way, he is just setting himeself up to be miserable. There are other ways to directly help without the conditions that will come back to bite you. If you are going to purchase the home and let them live there and they are otherwise paying the other bills and you will then own the property, what difference does it make if lazy son lives there or not?
If LW wants rid of the son, offering to pay the rent at a retirement community might be the nest option. Those places have restrictions on who can live there, and the son would probably not make the cut.
It's not really a gift when you start attaching conditions and dictating terms. So, if you want to set yourself up to miserable, then go ahead and say the son can't stay. And, of course, in reality, he might move out, but in short order will move back in. Not sure if the OP plans to charge them rent or not. But, either way, he is just setting himeself up to be miserable. There are other ways to directly help without the conditions that will come back to bite you. If you are going to purchase the home and let them live there and they are otherwise paying the other bills and you will then own the property, what difference does it make if lazy son lives there or not?
Yeah that was my thought. As long as the people are paying the utilities why bother concerning herself about the son living there? Once the elderly relatives are no longer living in the house then LW can kick him out.
__________________
Sometimes you're the windshield, and sometimes you're the bug.
Complete BS. This isn't a set of towels or some dinnerware. This is a HOUSE.
Whether you call it a gift or an investment--the "giver" can put any conditions on it that they want to. In this case, it would be VERY prudent to say the loser son can't stay there. Otherwise, in a few years when they pass away or go to a nursing home--she'll have to try to evict the SOB and that could take YEARS.
If they don't like the "conditions"--then they don't have to accept it.
Plus, people put "conditions" on "gifts" ALL THE TIME. When they first get their teenagers a car--you have to keep up your grades, not text and drive or drive if you've been drinking, don't miss curfew, etc...--otherwise the car goes away.
__________________
I'm not arguing, I'm just explaining why I'm right.
Well, I could agree with you--but then we'd both be wrong.
Complete BS. This isn't a set of towels or some dinnerware. This is a HOUSE.
Whether you call it a gift or an investment--the "giver" can put any conditions on it that they want to. In this case, it would be VERY prudent to say the loser son can't stay there. Otherwise, in a few years when they pass away or go to a nursing home--she'll have to try to evict the SOB and that could take YEARS.
If they don't like the "conditions"--then they don't have to accept it.
Plus, people put "conditions" on "gifts" ALL THE TIME. When they first get their teenagers a car--you have to keep up your grades, not text and drive or drive if you've been drinking, don't miss curfew, etc...--otherwise the car goes away.
You seem to be missing the point. Most likely they will agree to the conditions. Then the son will move back in. It's going to happen. So, if you want to set yourself up to miserable from the get go, then go ahead.
I do not blame the letter writer. He/she is not putting the the home in the elderly couples name but wants to let them live there till they pass and use the house for a investment. That is a lot of money the LW is planning to spend and it would be a huge headache to deal with the mooch later.
If your brain cant understand the connection, then far be it for me to try to explain it to you. Youre the only one that doesnt get it. Think about that for a minute...
__________________
America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...
Complete BS. This isn't a set of towels or some dinnerware. This is a HOUSE.
Whether you call it a gift or an investment--the "giver" can put any conditions on it that they want to. In this case, it would be VERY prudent to say the loser son can't stay there. Otherwise, in a few years when they pass away or go to a nursing home--she'll have to try to evict the SOB and that could take YEARS.
If they don't like the "conditions"--then they don't have to accept it.
Plus, people put "conditions" on "gifts" ALL THE TIME. When they first get their teenagers a car--you have to keep up your grades, not text and drive or drive if you've been drinking, don't miss curfew, etc...--otherwise the car goes away.
You seem to be missing the point. Most likely they will agree to the conditions. Then the son will move back in. It's going to happen. So, if you want to set yourself up to miserable from the get go, then go ahead.
No, you seem to be missing the point. She can put whatever conditions on it she wants. If they don't agree, that is their right and they don't have to accept it.
Get it in writing. If they then let him in, she then has every right to boot him out.
-- Edited by huskerbb on Sunday 14th of February 2016 04:17:56 PM
__________________
I'm not arguing, I'm just explaining why I'm right.
Well, I could agree with you--but then we'd both be wrong.
Strictly speaking, though, if he buys HIMSELF a house, and allows his elderly aunts to stay in it rent free - they are his guests and no one else should be moving in without his permission.
__________________
LawyerLady
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
If he continues t olive there, he might have squatter's rights to stay there after his parents are gone.
He should be paying rent to his parents so they can afford to keep living there without the LW's help.
Come on, this isn't Germany!
LOL!
I see what you did there!!
Well, thank goodness, because it went right over some people's heads...
Would those be the same people that can't understand something in context, but have to have the grammar and spelling perfect to figure it out?
That would be people that like to lecture me about the definition of pun, when the above comment is the PERFECT example of a pun...in addition to those you described...
__________________
America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...
1.
a joke exploiting the different possible meanings of a word or the fact that there are words that sound alike but have different meanings.
"the pigs were a squeal (if you'll forgive the pun)"
synonyms: play on words, wordplay, double entendre, innuendo, witticism, quip, bon mot
__________________
LawyerLady
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
This letter strikes a nerve with me. FIL says he's planning on selling his house and says he's going to give DH and I enough for a down payment on a house of our own. Problem is, any money he gives us would have more strings than a tampon factory. We've already decided to decline should he ever offer.
Not to get in the middle of all this but I don't read every thread. I never read the pooping in the streets thread. Or the washed up foot thread. Or the Zika thread. I can probably name at least ten threads I HAVEN'T read. So, in all honesty, if you (general you) are pulling something from another thread as a joke it really honestly doesn't always make sense. And not because the person is stupid, ignorant, or just can't grasp the English language. It's kind of like coming in at the punch line of a joke and not really understanding what people are laughing at. And no, I personally, don't have time to go read every single thread.
__________________
“You may shoot me with your words, you may cut me with your eyes, you may kill me with your hatefulness, but still, like air, I'll rise!” ― Maya Angelou
This letter strikes a nerve with me. FIL says he's planning on selling his house and says he's going to give DH and I enough for a down payment on a house of our own. Problem is, any money he gives us would have more strings than a tampon factory. We've already decided to decline should he ever offer.
You know your FIL best and that is probably a very good agreement you and DH have. It will save you a lot of future headaches.
__________________
Sometimes you're the windshield, and sometimes you're the bug.
Not to get in the middle of all this but I don't read every thread. I never read the pooping in the streets thread. Or the washed up foot thread. Or the Zika thread. I can probably name at least ten threads I HAVEN'T read. So, in all honesty, if you (general you) are pulling something from another thread as a joke it really honestly doesn't always make sense. And not because the person is stupid, ignorant, or just can't grasp the English language. It's kind of like coming in at the punch line of a joke and not really understanding what people are laughing at. And no, I personally, don't have time to go read every single thread.
1. So what? She wasn't talking to you, so who cares if you don't get it. Not every post is for every person. And those that did get it found it funny.
2. Welts DID read and post on that thread.
3. Perhaps it wouldn't be an issue if people didn't jump all over other when they don't know what they are talking about.
__________________
LawyerLady
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
Not to get in the middle of all this but I don't read every thread. I never read the pooping in the streets thread. Or the washed up foot thread. Or the Zika thread. I can probably name at least ten threads I HAVEN'T read. So, in all honesty, if you (general you) are pulling something from another thread as a joke it really honestly doesn't always make sense. And not because the person is stupid, ignorant, or just can't grasp the English language. It's kind of like coming in at the punch line of a joke and not really understanding what people are laughing at. And no, I personally, don't have time to go read every single thread.
1. So what? She wasn't talking to you, so who cares if you don't get it. Not every post is for every person. And those that did get it found it funny.
2. Welts DID read and post on that thread. And the title alone was enough to give a clue.
3. Perhaps it wouldn't be an issue if people didn't jump all over other when they don't know what they are talking about.
__________________
LawyerLady
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
Not to get in the middle of all this but I don't read every thread. I never read the pooping in the streets thread. Or the washed up foot thread. Or the Zika thread. I can probably name at least ten threads I HAVEN'T read. So, in all honesty, if you (general you) are pulling something from another thread as a joke it really honestly doesn't always make sense. And not because the person is stupid, ignorant, or just can't grasp the English language. It's kind of like coming in at the punch line of a joke and not really understanding what people are laughing at. And no, I personally, don't have time to go read every single thread.
If you haven't read all those threads, you are missing the party girl!!
This letter strikes a nerve with me. FIL says he's planning on selling his house and says he's going to give DH and I enough for a down payment on a house of our own. Problem is, any money he gives us would have more strings than a tampon factory. We've already decided to decline should he ever offer.
You know your FIL best and that is probably a very good agreement you and DH have. It will save you a lot of future headaches.
Thanks. It will save us future headaches. FIL would spend the rest of his life crowing about how he just haaaaad to help poor little Our Names buy a house. That statement would quickly be followed by him reminding us that if we could just be more like BIL and SIL that we would've been able to buy our own house and he wouldn't have had to come our rescue. Barf and no thanks.
We'll get a house when we're good and ready. We're content right where we are for the time being.