Wife's Dad died left her a lot of money and she is putting it in a personal account should l be mad

Wow. 😳

8/10

He carried this for 100+ posts and I wasted over an hour composing two of my replies so he got me.

I'm disappointed in the OP. I don't understand the mentality of someone who would do something like this.

You are spot on with this. However, the OP created this issue when he decided to go dictator mode with the finances before this situation occurred. HE created the problem, but not WANTS it to be done the right way now that the shoe is on the other foot. She is wise in keeping the money separate because his prior actions show that he will be a controlling prick in this marriage, which is probably why his kids do not live with mom and dad now.

chess vs checkers wrote:

family money wrote:

I would like to update this. Tonight after an expensive dinner out with friends, that l paid the whole bill out my money before the marriage. I told her before we go into this restaurant l want an understanding that you will pay me back for this meal and everything l paid for out of my savings when you get your money. She said no problem, but l then said, infact l would like you to cover all the household bills for a year like l did, and she said no problem. I told her l am taking a risk and she said she isn't going anywhere. Should l feel better?

5/10 you got most people for a few pages.

He had me with his troll. But as is frequently the case, he went to far and his last post has exposed him as a troll. I guess it reasonable for him to try and push the limits of the troll but this last attempt was too big of a leap and he wrecked the troll.

10/10 before the last post

3/10 after the last post.

OP, you could have done a lot better than the restaurant story. really blew what was otherwise a pretty good troll. that read like a lazy creative writing assignment from an 8th grader. show, don't tell bro.

Man thats not feeling right. But...I had a somewhat similar situation (sold investment home we both paid for) and here is what i did. Suggest that you just had a great idea! You found a money market paying 3 % (there are a few right now) , why dont we just put it there? Now if its a "lot" of money, 3% (in what amounts to a fancy savings) is a lot of a lot. Thats what i did and my wife said, oh thats a good idea (more or less). So what im saying is be a little passive aggressive and make some suggestions under the guise of having the money grow. Then you avoid the real question. And find out how really against the concept she is.

Raddison wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

1) Have ONE checking account and perhaps ONE savings account that you both have equal access to and equal ownership of.

While this sound egalitarian it is bad advice. If a partner dies joint bank accounts are frozen until the will is proved. This could leave the survivor without access to funds for a couple of months. Each partner should have an account in their own name so that they can access money. should the worst happen. Most couples do this with savings accounts.

Not true.

Are these soap opera troll posts some kinda toe in the water for a tv screen play or something? Or just a way to get a thrill from people that get upset over these ridiculous scenarios?

No you should not be mad at her, but if you continue she should be pissed at you.

Money you earn during a marriage is community property. Inheritance it not. It is sole and separate property - unless you commingle it. Your wife is doing the smart thing. She was likely advised of this.

Now, if she only spends the money on herself and never helps out the family, then you have a right to be miffed and start wondering about the strength of your marriage and her character. She should let you see the balance, include you in the decisions, etc, but she needs to keep it separate. 50% of marriages do not last. You should not get half this money if you should divorce.

Flagpole wrote:

Raddison wrote:

While this sound egalitarian it is bad advice. If a partner dies joint bank accounts are frozen until the will is proved. This could leave the survivor without access to funds for a couple of months. Each partner should have an account in their own name so that they can access money. should the worst happen. Most couples do this with savings accounts.

Not true.

Flagpole is correct

SDSU Aztec wrote:

It's her money so let it go. She can spend it however she likes.

I have a sizable 401K that I invested in long before I was married and it's 100% under my control. My wife had significant savings before we were married and that is her money. It's not likely we will divorce but if I put her name on my 401K account it would become half hers.

It's half hers anyway. If you two were to divorce, in most states, she gets half that money, unless you have some sort of prenup.

The greed and mine vs. hers always shocks me. I actually don't care if people get married or not, but getting married means that what's yours is hers and what's hers is yours. Why wouldn't you WANT all of what you have to be half hers? I just really don't understand that at all.

coach wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Not true.

Flagpole is correct

That should be my tagline.

Flagpole

Flagpole is correct

the clear answer wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Your friend is a bad marriage counselor.

It sounds like his friend is a marriage counselor that is keenly aware of how to keep wives in their husbands beds, which is the only thing marriage really needs to succeed.

Nope...he's very unaware, and a bad marriage counselor.

After reading this, maybe your wife not so smart. She need to get away from you as fast as possible. You sound really immature.

Again, the inheritance is for her. She needs to keep it separate so you don't get half when she wises up and leaves you. Just as you take your previous 401k/IRA money with you.

When married, you should only have one account for communal property. This is not communal property.

Now, your wife should use this money to help the household. 3-4% is reasonable. So if she got a 1million inheritance, then she should use 30-40k a year to help the household. She should control the money. Invest it as she wishes. Pay the taxes due.

My wife and I both got inheritances. She keeps hers separate. I keep mine separate. She got hers 15 years ago. I got mine 3. Her's is about 50% more than mine (the the initial amounts were similar, but her's has grown). She helped pay off our house 10 years ago. Until I retire, her contribute is over except for taxes. I pay the property taxes with mine - using the RMD (she does not have RMD as her total inheritance was in taxable accounts).

My income pays all the rest of our expenses. I make more than enough to cover everything and still save a considerable amount each month. Once I retire (in a few years), we'll split the expenses among the 3 accounts based on how much each one in it. Say 50% from our joint, 30% from her account and 20% from mine.

I don't go around complaining that the joint account is 90-95% from my income and savings before and during our marriage. That I support her. That's all community property. I agreed with her decision 10 years ago to retire and help raise our grandchildren. I made way more than her and working was a big stress for her. I'm happier and she is happier with her just doing taxes 3-4 months a year for a few clients.

Lastly, we are both open about where our money is and how it is invested. In fact, I help you invest her accounts (though the final decisions are hers).

tacprc wrote:

The money is hers, and she should get to control it. Similarly, if one of your family members dies and leaves you money, the money is yours and you should get to control it.

While what you wrote there is technically true, that is not how a successful marriage should operate. Money belongs to both. Both have control of the money, and spending it should be a decision made by both. Money is power, and if someone suddenly inherits a lot of money and "controls" that money, that is power over the other spouse. That is not a equal partnership.

Now, I do realize that some of you Beta men married subservient women so that you could feel like The Man, but that's still crap. Decisions about the family, including how to spend money is for both equally.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

"Her actions, as if described, are basically implying she is unsure of the marriage AND not willing to allow you, her current husband, to benefit from her new-found wealth."

A spouse does not have 100% control over the length of a marriage. Maybe they live happily after or one day one of them meets their soul mate. A spouse's personality could change making the marriage unbearable.

Smart people protect themselves.

You sound very insecure in your marriage.

She is not required to discuss it, but it is inappropriate not to in a marriage. A windfall for one is/should be a windfall for both.

sbeefyk2 wrote:

Here’s a thought.

When people who have never had a lot of money all of sudden inherit a lot of money, they freeze up. They are dealing with the death of a loved one and the pile of money is big to them. They want to take some deep breaths and figure out the best use. I suspect if she put it in the joint account you’d go buy a $200k car on day 1. She’ll eventually move it into the joint account when she’s ready. For now, who cares? You have a roof over your head and food on the table. If you want the expensive car, earn it. Don’t use her dad’s money.

1) Lots of assumptions there, brother.

2) If he took that money and bought an expensive car with it without discussing it with her, then he'd be in the wrong.

3) It is not "her dad's money". He's dead. He doesn't have any money.

4) Money comes all the time to married couples that they didn't "earn". No shame in that. The shame comes when one spouse doesn't view the windfall as an equal gift to the other.

No, it's not hers here in California. By that logic, we could be married for 6 months, get divorced and she could walk away with half my assets. Laws are based on fairness.

The reason smart people don't give up separate property is that 50% of marriages end in divorce.