My Husband and His Mom Own a House Together

My Husband and His Mom Own a House Together
Say goodbye to debt forever. Start Ramsey+ for free: bit.ly/35ufR1q
Visit the Dave Ramsey store today for resources to help you take control of your money! goo.gl/gEv6Tj
Did you miss the latest Ramsey Show episode? Don’t worry-we’ve got you covered! Get all the highlights you missed plus some of the best moments from the show. Watch debt-free screams, Dave Rants, guest interviews, and more!
Want to watch FULL episodes of The Ramsey Show? Make sure to go to The Ramsey Show (Full Episodes) at: www.youtube.co...
Check out the show at 4pm EST Monday-Friday or anytime on demand. Dave Ramsey and his co-hosts talking about money, careers, relationships, and how they impact your life. Tune in to The Ramsey Show and experience one of the most popular talk radio shows in the country!
Ramsey Network (Subscribe Now!)
• The Ramsey Show (Highlights):
www.youtube.co...
• The Ramsey Show (Full Episodes): www.youtube.co...
• The Dr. John Delony Show: www.youtube.co...
• The Rachel Cruze Show: www.youtube.co...
• Anthony ONeal: www.youtube.co...
• The Ken Coleman Show: www.youtube.co...
• The Christy Wright Show: www.youtube.co...
• EntreLeadership: www.youtube.co...

[@Chris-ms5bd]

So the mom made a 12-year investment and the stepdaughter only wants to pay her the initial investment. It should be sold and the profits split 50/50 between the husband and mom

[@shanescrimshire8395]

Sorry to step on your post! I agree with your premise

[@cyrilkorletey3433]

Couldn't have said it any better 👏🏾

[@cyrilkorletey3433]

Essentially the mom didn't even live in the house so she hasn't benefited off it in anyway

[@rbrucerye]

Well to be completely fair it should be the first $75,000 goes to the mom for the debt and the remaining amount gets split evenly.

[@leathelandlady]

@@rbrucerye exactly what you said!

[@ottohome]

Well, why does he (the son) make all the profit? Why do only the son and his wife benefit from the investment they (Mom and son) made in 2008?

[@SuMMeRFLi5]

That's what I was thinking too. Legally, she's entitled to 50% profit of the sale. She already put in half + more it sounds. I hate to say this, but it sounds like "mommy" is being railroaded here.

[@alannarouette2694]

because the agreement at the beginning was to just pay her back what she put into the home

[@SuMMeRFLi5]

@@alannarouette2694 What we're missing here is if that agreement is contractually in writing. If not, they're not off the hook for taking Mommy for a ride.

[@ottohome]

@@alannarouette2694 but also to share in the benefit of renting it out down the road. Not a great idea for sure, but to ignore that (assuming it was a clear understanding between them) seems very wrong. Ask Mom what she thinks would be equitable, and go from there. Hopefully it all works out.

[@alannarouette2694]

@@ottohome the daughter in law said after renovations it would be worth a lot more so if she mom helping pay for the renos to boost the profit? it's such a messy situation like i genuinely see all sides here. This is why I love the dave ramsey show it gives perfect examples of what not to do haha

[@CarysCorner]

I'm thinking this is not the whole story. Mom was expecting an additional stream of income, she presumably will want her share of the gain on this property at the sell.

[@jaydynamite8680]

Exactly

[@jennyberger6688]

Exactly she’s going to fight for what she’s actually deserved by partnership once they sell it. She’ll get the 120,000 for purchase owed and repairs. Then half of the sale.

[@stefanossmitty3318]

Exhibit number 100 of why these entanglements often end up with unintended consequences.

[@veronikabrozova]

Rightfully so! She even invested more, the majority of the profit should be hers.

[@catherinetsitlakidis6746]

I thought so too

[@annetraut8247]

I don't think the son gets 100% of the equity in the house. 90/10 split on the initial investment and 12 years later the son still hasn't paid her back for the upfront costs. That doesn't sound like a loan. That sounds like she owns at least half the house.

[@SuMMeRFLi5]

It sounds to me like the husband/wife team wants to take all the profits and ONLY pay Mom for what she put into the house. That's not cool. I hope Mommy gets an attorney because Mom is entitled to the profits of the sale.

[@leathelandlady]

@@SuMMeRFLi5 Exactly. And there's been a lot of appreciation in that area since 2008, it's across from San Francisco. They don't get all of it, no way!!

[@billschlafly4107]

What wasn't answered during the call is, "who made the payments and paid the taxes for 12 years?" Sounds like mom just fronted more of the down payment and the son has been vigorously paying it off. Good on him and her too if she helped him. But the caller doesn't know the actual numbers because she probably showed up well after the purchase and now wants mom out of the picture.

[@adrianruiz8783]

Who was living in the house probably paying less than renting somewhere else a the end probably she (wife )should be grateful mom pay way more and the deals was to rent to make money that wasn’t a gift, he should be ashamed to pay just 90000, mom get a lawyer a least keep half of the money you son doesn’t deserve to call you mom😡

[@icantthinkofascreenname3064]

You didn’t listen to the details. The plan was always for the son to pay his mom back her part of the original cost and own it in the end. There wasn’t a written agreement to keep it forever as a rental, he does not need to pay her half of the appreciated value since it was not the agreement, if it had gone down in value he’d have still had to pay her the amount agreement upon. She wanted to help him out with the down payment and that’s what she did.

[@s_1408]

Dave got this one wrong!! did he miss the part where it's supposed to be an investment property with the mom getting add itional income off of the property? If they sell it she won't get that income.

[@murderofcrows7738]

Dave is too anti mother in law to ever fully listen. He hears “Mother In Law” and decides they are toxic, controlling and stops listening.

[@kyelangrehr183]

they had a mortgage son and daughter invested more than you think.

[@s_1408]

@@kyelangrehr183 but it's still unfair to change the original deal which was to have secondary passive once for the both of them. Now the daughter in law swoops in (who had no part in the original agreement) and change it??

[@michellerichardson3090]

Technically since her name is on it the check will have both of their names on it

[@Zeus0886]

This should be between the mother and son. The wife has nothing to do with it. Sounds fishy. The husband better pay attention.

[@I_like_turtles_67]

The wife is trying to figure out how to extract the most resources out of her simp husband. His mom gave him $90,000 to put down as an investment property

[@robertwhite6203]

In laws don’t count !

[@Plumbgod1]

@@I_like_turtles_67 really hope hes not a simp, she sounds sketchy

[@kennynguyen6810]

The party that has 0% interest in the property is the one that wants to sell and get the profit... she is just calling to get validation on her rationale. “Dave Ramsey agrees with me!”

[@DisabilityExams]

Bingo - caller hasn't paid a cent on the house.

[@msglamazon45]

Agree Kenny

[@michaelmarquez6133]

Dang you nailed it like you really did actually I mean this lady doesn't have anything to do with this besides the fact that she's married to one of the owners and here they are basically trashing the Mom calling her a control freak well yeah she's a little bit of a control freak she owns half of this property and they just want to be like here's the money you put in originally you don't get none of the gains by well that's messed up

[@nanosarbaz]

Wth type of advice was that? The son and wife are rootless and ungrateful 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@kennynguyen6810]

To be fair, we don’t know what the husband/son actually thinks. It’s just word of mouth from the wife what she believes her husband wants.

[@M.Stick11]

It’s funny how the wife has more opinion when she initially had zero invested on the rental property and the husband only put down 10K.. OHHH GREED. Money does really expose the real character of a person. LOL!!!

[@bullonwallstreet]

Yes it does. Gree or entitlement is alive and real in this world.

[@kyelangrehr183]

they had a mortgage son and daughter invested more than you think.

[@mxerb5912]

No kidding. She has zero say since the deal was made before they were married and now she expects the full equity of a condo the mom paid the majority of. Then Dave has the nerve to call him a mommies boy.

[@jaymanxv]

@@savannahbyrd7884 She'll soon be divorced because she's a dumb dumb that doesn't know her place. The two investors are all that matters here.

[@mxerb5912]

@@savannahbyrd7884 most states agree assets acquired before marriage aren’t marital assets

[@michellejeanine9074]

50/50 no buyout it’s considered investment, plus her $90k. If it wasn’t for his mom they wouldn’t have that property. The wife shouldn’t put her 2cents in. Or they wouldn’t even have a place to live. I can’t believe this.

[@rockmo4896]

Uncle Dave is a mile off in this case.

[@oroville12345]

It's funny I didn't even start the video..... His wife is jealous and can't stand the idea of not being in control.

[@oroville12345]

Remember men she doesn't love you she loves what you can do for her.

[@oscarport5454]

I disagree with their advise on this one... Mom should get paid the 75k remaining left on her initial investment, once they agreed to sell the apartment it’s 50/50 of what ever is left between the mom and the son. Simple as that.

[@vloh168]

@Sponge Bob I don’t understand your logic. The mom put the money down with the expectation and agreement with her son that this would be a long term investment property; this was not a loan by the mom. The premise that she should just be paid back what she put in is synonymous with a simple loan (not an investment) and thus is contrary to the agreement. In fact, just paying her back what she put in is worse than a loan because, at least with a loan, you typically get paid back interest. It should also be noted that, in all likelihood, the home has appreciated in value since it was initially purchased. At a minimum, the mom should be getting a part of that appreciation. It makes no sense that the son gets to retain all the appreciation, especially when this wasn’t a loan, but rather an investment by the mom. They were essentially business partners, and both should reap the profits. To put it another way, if you gave Steve Jobs $100k to help him start Apple with the expectation that you would eventually get some of the profits from Apple, I don’t think you’d buy the argument that Steve Jobs can get away with simply paying you back the $100k and nothing else, as he would’ve now paid for the entire cost of Apple himself. (The hypothetical assumes that you and Steve Jobs are the cofounders of the business, that the only contributors of capital to the business are you and Steve Jobs). If the son decides to change the deal and sell the home, it’s a breach of contract, plain and simple. The mom would be entitled to her expectation damages, which is her share of whatever rental income she could have expected to generate from her original investment.

[@whatevergoesforme5129]

@@vloh168 True. Those siding with this caller who does not even know all the details should understand taht if the mom is amenable to being paid back the "loan" then she should get the principal plus interest for 12 years. And buying out is not the same as paying a loan. Buying out is based on the market value of the property at the time it is sold and by law, the mom and son are co-owners, so on paper, it should be 50-50 split of the sale. If the son foots the bill for renovation, then the mom can pay the son half of that cost.

[@shanescrimshire8395]

Wouldn't a 50% partner get 50% of profit when they sell?

[@mikekeenanphd]

And she is a 90% partner! She put up 90 and he put up 10. And she is only get 90 back and he is getting 410. Really?

[@ldtriton]

@@mikekeenanphd No doubt... She took 90% of the risk. What if this was right before the housing market crash. Would anyone be giving any of her investment that she lost back to her?

[@jennyberger6688]

Yeah na she’ll get it.

[@mikekeenanphd]

@Sasi Helen It is not clear in the podcast. She paid 90k to start and he paid 10k in 2008. In 2018, she says "They paid it off". So, you are partially correct. It isn't clear what her percentage contribution is. Did she pay nothing toward the mortgage? If we assume no price appreciation since 2008, then she isn't owed more than 90k plus whatever else she paid into it. But, that seems unlikely. And it doesn't take into account the greater time value of her original contribution.

[@mikekeenanphd]

@Sponge Bob ​ If you give me 90k and I give you back 90k in 12 years, that is not a good investment for you.

[@yamamancha]

This wife is going to escalate this to a point where mom sues the son. And she'll win. Why doesn't Dave get that the mom is due interest? She's the co-owner. Sometimes I wish Dave would actually listen to the caller instead of trying to be a character. He's leading this woman down the wrong path.

[@kyelangrehr183]

they had a mortgage son and daughter invested more than you think.

[@yamamancha]

@Sponge Bob They would have to have a written agreement that he can buy her out at her original principal investment. It's clear this caller doesn't know all the facts of the deal between the mother and son. If, as stated, they are co-owners, buying mom out means paying her 50% of the current value of the property. Even if the son pays for all remodeling work, it doesn't matter. It even sounds like the son owes the mom $75k on top of 50% of the current value. They're in trouble if they think they can just pay mom until their even for the acquisition value and take everything on top of that.

[@yeshuarules8154]

@@kyelangrehr183 They also lived in it so they would be paying rent somewhere! The mortgage would still be a lot less than 12 years of equity build up too. And we are only getting one side of this deal, I would like to see what mom says since she paid the most down, probably it was her credit for the loan, and she was expecting an income from rental property long term. Probably to supplement her retirement!!

[@whatevergoesforme5129]

@@yamamancha True, buying out someone means pegging it at market value when it will be sold. If the son is talking of repaying the "loan" according to this caller, and not about buying out the mom as advised by Dave, then he should pay her the whole amount with interest for 12 years. However, we don't know what truly transpired because we are listening to the wife who has no idea about the deal between mom and son when she was not around yet (I presume).

[@leathelandlady]

I just rewatched this. From the beginning she starts with: "I'm calling to get some advice, I have an idea of what I should do...". Just to be clear honey, YOU don't own anything.

[@murderofcrows7738]

Not as long as mom stays on the loan she doesn’t. She wants his mom out so she can get her half if things don’t work out in the marriage.

[@lipglossed]

Problem with this advice is that it sounds like this condo was purchased as an investment property and not as a loan to him. If she is still thinking that way then they should sell it, get her back her $90k investment (sounds like they both put in another 10k into it so that kinda breaks even) and then split the equity. If Mom wants them to have it then great but if not, I don't see why the son gets to keep all of the profit.

[@kyelangrehr183]

they had a mortgage son and daughter invested more than you think.

[@ba11in0nabudget4]

It sounded to me like mom co-signed and helped with the initial down payment. Didn't sound like she was much involved beyond that. I do think she should get more than 90k back though She should get something off the appreciation as well since it was an investment for her.

[@mufuhnjoh9742]

What type of loan without interest

[@davidportnoy]

doesnt work like that you dont get paid back your amount and then split the profits evenly if you put in 90 percent you get 90 percent of the proceeds. the son in reality has no equity in this deal he put in 10,000 she put in 90,000 that means the mother has 90 percent equity and the son has 10 percent equity. its like me putting in 5k on a 500,000 house and you putting up 495k than the house goes up 100 percent i dont get appreciation split evenly on the 495k because i didnt put up an even amount. This is th case if I paid the partner back at the time of sale because you cant just get an interest free loan for the time that me and you owned the house and then capitalize on the whole appreciation

[@davidportnoy]

@Sasi Helen totally false bozo

[@lookingforsure]

If she s okay just being '' paid back'' that's very generous of her...

[@leathelandlady]

Mom bought it as investment property, she most certainly will not be.

[@BetYouHateMeNow]

exactly 90 k invest in stock or sp would have netted her probably double what she invested or close

[@bangladeshirealtor]

@@BetYouHateMeNow for sure but she’s gonna now want a good chunk of the resale profit The DIL , just wants all the profit so they can put $ down a expensive Bay Area housing

[@BetYouHateMeNow]

@@bangladeshirealtor yeah it's ridiculous, meanwhile I would have just been grateful to have live there for 12 years for essentially 35k for the whole 12 years. By then they should have saved a down payment but instead now they want her to take the loss.

[@BetYouHateMeNow]

@Sasi Helen I hope you are kidding with that comment.

[@Anonyme67]

The type of daughter in law I hope I will never have

[@johnbreitmeier3268]

Dave, you need to treat this as a business deal. Imagine that 12 years ago you went into business with a partner on a rental property. You put in $90k up front and your clearly junior partner puts in only $10k. You later put in even more. Presumably the point of buying a rental property is to make money from renting it out. Both parties acknowledge that this was the intent of the agreement. We know the condo was habitable, because your partner takes sole possession of the condo, moves in and has been living there for 12 yrs!!! Without completing the renovation. We don’t know who is paying the mortgage or the condo dues or the utilities but you have received 0% of the fair rental value for those 12 years. I checked. Average fair rental value for all Oakland for that period is around $2300/mo so there should have been $331,200 in missed rent payments, 90% of which should be yours less dues and other expenses that are not mortgage. (Maybe $25k of payments were made to you over the 12 years by your junior partner that might have been rent - $25k /12 years /12 months means $174/mo rent for a half million dollar condo. That is less than 10% of real value.) Somewhere in there your partner marries and the new spouse who is not on the deed decides the deal is off and only wants to pay you back the original investment (less the 25k) with no interest for 12 years and keep all the profit on the deal. Your rate of return on a 12 year investment is exactly 0 - less if you did put more money in over the 12 years. Are you happy with that deal? Would you do it with me? I promise to thank you after the 12 years of free rent are up and to keep 100% of any profit as your gift to me. I’ll even send flowers. Can we move the condo from Oakland to Jackson’s Hole, WY? I like to flyfish. Dave, please admit you blew this one Big Time.

[@pgallegos749]

EXACTLY!!! Dave blew it!

[@science4jeff]

I think it was implied that the mother was okay with not receiving rent, and not receiving any of the value appreciation of the property. Hard to tell, since the deal was probably never written down. They really should offer to pay back more than the remaining $75k.

[@johnbreitmeier3268]

@@science4jeff It is quite clear that the mother was NOT okay with "not receiving any of the value appreciation of the property" or there would be no dispute. DUH! Are you always this dense??Even according to the evil daughter-in-law, the plan was to renovate and RENT OUT the condo, not flip it for her son's sole profit. So explain to me how the son paid off a 30 year loan on what is now a $500K condo in 10 years, but didn't have $100 K t put down?? How much did they buy the condo for genius?? What is it worth now without remodeling?? What would the remodel cost ?

[@CarnivoreStork]

I do believe Mommy in law is going to want 50% of the equity from this investment sale. $250,000. And I’m sure nothing was written down. 👀

[@Zatoichinisanyon]

Why wouldn't they split the proceeds by the ratio of what they put into the property? Mom was investing for rental income but could settle for proceeds from sale.

[@mastersfan04]

The mom is trying to protect her son. Wife wants out of the condo, buys the house, that way they take the property in comnunity property, wait 2 years file papers ie irreconcilable differences and BAM! She owns a home she didnt even have to pay for.

[@dportal844]

Ding, ding, ding!!!

[@sc0Obs]

Currently going through this. Wife wants out and thinks my previous home is now half hers. Nope, you only get what was accumulated during the marriage

[@DonnieDarko1]

🙁

[@mastersfan04]

@Andrew E the rate in California is about two thirds end in divorce.

[@davinasquirrel7672]

Don't be ridiculous. But both of them are screwing the mother out of her fair share of capital gain.

[@littlemax8851]

The wife wants all the equity and to give her Mother in-law 0% return for 12 years of investment. See how greedy that sounds? She should be ashamed of herself. I would never diss someone who put me on like that.

[@ping7364]

Very greedy

[@kennynguyen6810]

You left out the part that the wife has ZERO interest in the property she wants to sell...

[@TeKnoVKNG23]

Something doesn't smell right here....why is the wife involved or making the call? She's not involved, she paid nothing into this. First she said co-own, then she said co-sign, there's a huge difference there. Co-sign just makes you liable for the loan, you don't own anything, but in this case she is a 50% owner of the house. Dave's math is way off here, the mother is not at fault, this sounds like wife's idea she's trying to spring on her husband. Mom is owed A LOT more than 75k if the house has appreciated that much. Wife has seen the value of the house now and is just after the money. You can just hear it in her voice and the way she tries to paint it "they have a rocky relationship history" etc. at the end. She's talking out of her a$$ trying to seem like the good person here. Very suspect.

[@whatevergoesforme5129]

I am Asian and Asians tend to help family members financially but we will not do it with someone we have a rocky relationship with LOL. Why would the mother co-sign for someone she does not like no matter the blood relationship? And the fact she put in her money and is actually the co-owner if the title of the property is in both the names of her son and herself means that it was not a rocky relationship. This woman just wants validation from Dave (who seems to have issues with parent-child relationships) to tell her husband, IMHO, since she has no business in what has transpired between her husband and his mom. What we hear is hearsay and her side of the story. Instead of renovating that condo, they should buy their own house.

[@leathelandlady]

Why is she calling and not her husband?

[@s_1408]

Exactly!!!

[@asaadb1]

thirsty and broke

[@leathelandlady]

@@asaadb1 💯

[@ethanking4954]

Because she telling him to do it.

[@leathelandlady]

@@ethanking4954 That's obvious. She's messy. That's between him and his mother.

[@tygur23]

This KAREN needs to stop trying to twist things for her benefit and Dave being negative towards the husband is irresponsible bcuz he doesn't know the other side of the story

[@arturopalos2739]

The husband total return of investment should be 100,000 (20%) after selling the condo for 500,000. Otherwise I see it as they are defrauding the old lady.

[@gabbyh6069]

It might be more if he’s paid more of the mortgage than the mother

[@riceball777]

what a huge blessing the mother did for her son to help him get started on wealth building

[@jimroscovius]

It was a bad deal from the start. You don't buy things with mommies, daddies, siblings, etc. It creates a mess.

[@riceball777]

@@jimroscovius how was this a bad deal for the son?? The son has almost no money for the down payment. Plus his income and credit was not good enough to get a mortgage. The mother put down $90,000 for the down payment and cosigned her name so he can get the loan and he lives in the house without his mother. Now the house is paid off worth $500,000 and the mother only ask for $100,000. This was a huge blessing the mother did for her son. With out the mother the sons net worth would probably be zero and because of her his net worth is close to half a million not including any other assists he has outside this home.

[@murderofcrows7738]

And yet, the mother in law gets referred to as controlling and dismissed as “mommy.” Dave expects respect from his own family, but constantly encourages his callers to dismiss their own parents. He would want the return in his own investment. Why would he expect this mother not to want a return on hers?

[@jimroscovius]

@@riceball777 We don't know that the mother will settle for $100,000. What's to stop her from wanting half, or all, of the profit? The wife said her husband has had problems in the past with his mom. Don't do things that can cause problems later. That's why I don't cosign for relatives or friends.

[@ar15tac]

@@jimroscovius I would think that the mom and him should split whatever the profit is per percentages put in... counting for when it was invested.

[@poemsaloud]

Mom put in 100K, son 10K. Each should have contributed 55K down payment. Sell condo for 500K. Mum gets 250K Plus 45K ( less 25K that has been given, less half of condo remodelling cost). Therefore Mum gets 270K and pays half of reno cost. Son and meddlesome DIL should get 230K and pay half of reno cost.

[@liviaclaire]

You seem to forget that there was a mortgage. It seems that the son paid 10k + taxes and mortgage and is also going to pay for reno that will make the house worth 500k. Mom seems to have paid 90k for the downpayment and some 10k down the road. I agree she should get more than her 100k for a 12 year investment, but nowhere near 270k.

[@davinasquirrel7672]

Whatever the final ratio calculation, the mom deserves more than just a straight payout of the initial investment. I agree, all these other factors should be brought to the table when working out the percentage of capital gain.

[@veronikabrozova]

This was a horrible advice! Mom essentially bought the condo and still (12 years!) have not been paid back. She carried and still carries the majority of this investment risk. She is entitled to the profits! She has the same right to buy it from them for 10 grand they owe her, not 425.000. Sell it, split in half and pay each other whaťs owed. Start clean.

[@arturopalos2739]

So, the wife wants to be a free rider with 0 zero investment or any risk. Buying her out of her house for peanuts.

[@aimercab8630]

If he's selling for $500,000, Mom should get more than the original $90,000. She went into this deal as an investment; Now her son gets to reap ALL the benefits of the investment, when she put down almost ALL of the cash initially? That doesn't sound fair at ALL! Something's off here.

[@splad126]

why is the wife with 0 money put in is concern? let the son and mom talk it out...wife should be out of it

[@lindsaymegan6994]

So the mom doesn’t see any return on a $90,000 investment made ten years ago? They think the full $400,000 profit is just theirs and Dave supports this? They are are screwing over his own mom? I guess they deserve each other.

[@ADR7707]

This deal is between mom and her son. The daughter-in-law is all in the mix without having contributed any funds. Mom put up 90 percent of the down payment in the first place. So who is really being selfish here? Upon selling, the son and his wife should find themselves fortunate to walk away with half of the equity, $250K, if they want to be fair about it. He only put up 10 percent. If it wasn't for mom, they would have nothing. SMH.

[@jaydynamite8680]

I'll put in 100k, you put in only 10k and keep all equity upon sell. Just pay me my 100k down-payment. ~ The wife's weird logic

[@leathelandlady]

The worse part is Dave is agreeing with her! Then she's going to get it in her head that's a good idea. Hmph!

[@jaymanxv]

Godspeed. This advice though 😂 Let's see, I put up 90% of an investment that quintuples and instead of a 450k payday my investment magically turns into a 0% loan.

[@liviaclaire]

Dude, there was a mortgage. From what I gathered the son paid all the mortgage and taxes and mom paid 90k downpayment and some 10k. We don't know how much this house increased in value during these 10 years. Son might have paid 300k to the bank all those years for all we know.

[@Erick-bg3cw]

Sounds to me like mom is entitled to way more than her initial investment. she put 90% of the initial funds! Not fair at all IMO.

[@KTSpeedruns]

There should be a simple rule for buying a house with someone: if you don’t plan on spending the rest of your life with that person, don’t buy a house with them. Had a coworker who was working minimum wage to go in on a house with her two sisters. Had to tell her how bad of an idea that was on so many fronts. She was using a credit card as an emergency tool as well. No getting through to her. She and her sisters probably got a 30 yr mortgage on 5% down or something like that.

[@karlloper3838]

Mom should get 90% of profit. Kids should get 10%

[@davinasquirrel7672]

Slight re-adjustment of that split, given he has given mom some payback. But sure, mom does deserve a bigger share of the capital gain rather than just payback of the initial investment.

[@djpuplex]

These women and these houses it never ends, so much energy going into to mere shelter, it amazes me. She just wants that equity when she files on him like 50% of them do.

[@DisabilityExams]

70%

[@thundercricket4634]

@@DisabilityExams Worse even than that. You've got a 90%+ chance of getting divorced within 5 years if you marry today. For men it's tantamount to financial suicide.

[@NomastiAfricanWarlord]

@@thundercricket4634 Where are you guys getting these statistics from...

[@PC-ch1md]

Sorry to say but it’s more of your mother in law’s house and not your husband’s so if there’s anybody who should be calling here it’s the mother in law. It should be the other way around, mother in law should just buy you out for 10k, how would you like that? Good thing it’s on her name so when they decide to sell check would be under her name too

[@blackonblack...9244]

My dad owned 3 apartment buildings and lived in one of them. What's the issue? Keep the condo and continue to make money.

[@DOKOTV]

That’s why asian parents say know who you are marrying with really good.

[@sweethomechicago]

Surprised. Dave really got this one wrong. 1st time I disagreed with him on a financial issue. It is completely unethical to shortchange the mom out of the profits. Mom should give him 10k, kick him out, renovate and bank 400k. By this logic that's equal. If you see this comment, do not agree to this deal mom. Also son, your wife is an awful human. PS you're headed for divorce.

[@jojohns9670]

Wife contributed ZERO!!!!! 2. If the house value has appreciated even before the remodeling, how the heck does the mum get back only the dollar amount of what she put in? This girl is evil. She's gonna drive a wedge between the mother and son, and years later divorce the guy and take all his property.

[@barbylee8999]

Wife is trouble as usual ...they want money and control of son...jealous. Of good relationship. With him and his mom.. Wife should be happy for them taking good care of her

[@frenchyalicea649]

The mom can easily go for 1/2 the proceeds considering she put in 90k and he only put 10k. His getting 400k and her having put in the bulk of the down-payment doesnt seem fair...

[@arthrodea]

Can one person (the son) just decide to sell a house without the second person who owns it (the mother) agreeing to that?? Also I don't see how the son gets the full 400K appreciation value and the mom only gets her initial investment back - when she clearly had stated she was going to use this an an investment property (with eventual rent money bringing her income). I think she is legally entitled to a lot more than that - like her initial investment x whatever percent appreciation. Or maybe a 50/50 split on the 400K profit?

[@marshhen]

Does this woman understand that they only see 10% of the proceeds of the sale? That is all he paid in. You can tell she thinks she will cash in after her "redecorating". I bet they do not have 90% of the sale price to buy her out. They cannot put it up for sale without her permission. The wife should back away from this and not get involved.

[@aliceriegel5125]

Split the profit! When selling, both will need to sign paperwork, and if she doesn’t get 1/2 she may not sign. Why does he get ALL the profit? She wanted to make money on the investment. Dave goofed up on this one.

[@betruetoyourself7162]

Omg Daughter in law name is not on the deed. She had no say. Dave wants the kids to have free rent for 2-3 years and essentially borrow the mothers money for free without interest. IMO that is wrong it doesn’t sound like the intent was to give her son an interest free loan. Mother put in 100k and got 24 k in rent in 10yrs. Good way to rip her off.

[@Loly920]

Moms tell sons what they need to do because they want to manipulate them. Some sons just don’t grow up also. This is why some sons get married with woman that tell them what to do just like mommy. Step up Man.

[@cannednolan8194]

Gold digger needs to stop. She should stay out of this and it would give her husband a small steady stream later.(which sounds like it wont be enough). So if we use her thinking in her. She can give us 90g and put down 10 the. Pay $2000 a year back towards her larger down payment. So 12 years later we are at 1/3 of the amount. Then let’s sell the property and pay her back the other 2/3 giving us the about 300g profit. Now let’s get that 100g from her for our next real estate investment.

[@williamjones6971]

Troublemaker taking with both fists. You can hear the animosity and resentment in her voice. This is one for the courts, who will hear ALL sides.

[@digiver]

Uncle Dave, why do you feel that son and his wife deserves all the profits from the house? Between mom and son had an agreement to lease the house and split the rent money, meaning mom had an intention for this house to be her investment, which in turn means she deserves a port of the profit made from the house sales. I think most would agree with this logic. So, why tell daughter in law to get all the profits from the house sales and give mom only the initial investment? I love your shows by the way, so don't get me wrong, just curious.

[@DCfan6767]

Why should the husband n wife get all the profit. Bogus. And why does Ramsey think she doesn’t deserve some of the profit?

[@CerronPritchett]

Lol she is supposed to get 450k not 100k since she put in 90% of the money they are really ripping the mom off.

[@myprincessa2253]

The caller is in LaLa land. Nobody in the world will walk away from an investment with what they came in with. Her mother in law is the owner, they were paying rent.

[@lamlangthien3882]

this is the thing i dont agree with you Dave, Mom deserves the money for the investment over the years. The wife has nothing to do with it.

[@kristineericksen3031]

Before any remodel takes place, son should buy mom out.

[@armyretguy7365]

I often wonder how many friends/family members have found a call in about them, then get really mad at the caller.... It’s not like nobody watches or listens to this show, it’s huge. How’d you like to be a fly on the wall during those confrontations? LOL

[@maidieuhanh]

Mathematically this doesn't make sense. Mom puts in $90k but gets $75k in return when the condo appreciates astronomically? Unless son pays all renovations and they have some written agreement that he gets to keep all profit, this isn't looking right. 😕

[@liviaclaire]

There was a mortgage. It appears the son has paid of the mortgage and has already given/will give back 25k by the end of the years so there will be 75k left. We don't know how much was the house worth when they bought it and if it has appreciated astronomically or not.

[@bhk1105]

Dave you’re wrong! The mom saw this as an investment property for additional income, not a loan to her son. And the wife sounds shady!!!!!

[@victsus8051]

Like D Ramsey said with a good return of investment in the first year the mom could earned 6,300 dollars with 7% return to total 96,300 dollars, second year 6% of return could have another 5,778 dollars for the total of 102,078 and more every year for the other 8 years left The son and his wife are ripping off the poor lady 🤦🏽‍♂️

[@anthonytrujillo8158]

Strange thinking. She is on the deed. She put down 100. He wants to make a 400k profits. Now she is a control freak. In court she is entitled to 1/2 of those profits?

[@CerronPritchett]

Lol of not more since she put in most of the money

[@billschlafly4107]

This call is full of "assuming" and "essentially", which means her husband doesn't want to include her in actual numbers. Pin that man down for answers or just keep making him sandwiches.

[@anawhite1574]

😂😂😂

[@MateoHall]

This deal got really messy really quickly. That’s what would scare me from going in on a deal with someone I’m not married to

[@dolletemyu8388]

Maybe his mom did it on purpose to protect his son from a greedy daughter-in-law in case his son needs to divorce his wife.

[@dolletemyu8388]

@Sponge Bob correct me if I’m wrong, but I think it depends on which state you are.

[@anastasiabeaverhaus9]

The mother gets back all of her investment PLUS half the profit.

[@TheTbabylati]

Why is she in on it? Her husband made a deal with his mom and now that stepdaughter comes along he wants to change his mind on it. He needs to buy his mom out correctly and stop listening to his wife. We need to hear the other side to this

[@JP-js7nz]

Mom is planning on getting 1/2 of the equity

[@newtec-kd6vy]

Why is the wife involved? Let the husband deal with it.

[@nssg94]

So the son makes profit while the mom makes nothing?

[@betruetoyourself7162]

I think that is what Dave wants

[@jameswalker5645]

The problem is you're going to pay her back and then when you decide to sell she'll want half

[@Neddie2k]

As parents we want to help our kids get on to the property ladder, don't buy a house with your kid. Gift the kid the money and back out. But in this situation depending on her financial standing, give her, her equity in the house and go build your life.

[@soonermagic24]

This woman..... smh

[@TheBlackDorothyZbornak]

Is it the Bates Motel?

[@panther6152]

If I was mom, I’d say if we selling, I’d do a 90/10 rule with y’all on selling. You put $10k down, I put $90k. Which is 90/10. So when we sell for $500k, I’m a take my 90% of $500k which is $450k and you all get $50k. You earned money and I earned money. I never wanted to sell then but you all thought you get $400K for only $10k. GTFOH. Plus the mom got a good point. She needs another set of income outside is SS. That’s why she rented. One sided

[@Devinfrbs]

"Meekness is not weakness it's power under control" - Oh my god that's good.

[@matthewwilliams9200]

she invested in you give her 163k 5% comound as payoff, if you don't you are messing up badly 5 percent compound would be great offer to stop her from feeling the loss

[@davinasquirrel7672]

Mom is getting a short end of the stick here, she is not getting a proportional cut of the capital gain. That should be factored in, and paid off accordingly, and then, and only then, will there be no hard feelings. But given the 90/10 initial down payment, she may well feel entitled to somewhere near the 90% of capital gain. So it needs to be re-evaluated on some of the payback that has been done (so not 90% to mom) but somewhere closer to the middle I guess. She is now older, her income potential is less, and that needs to be factored in. Otherwise you leave her fairly broke, and she wants to move in with you in a few years. Don't take the short term greed on this, be generous.

[@cym3003d]

All of the above.

[@offerskirksey2255]

What’s your household income?

[@Yesboiii99]

I ain't saying she's a gold digger...

[@cokebottle86]

Wife, let your husband negotiate with his mother. The mother only invested expecting a ROI. It’s not fair to cheat her out of the profit of her investment. Her $90k-100k investment sat in a property for over 10 years unavailable for her usage but you don’t think she is owed any additional profit (interest) from said investment?

[@MrJay197409]

Maybe it just me but it bugs me but to me a trailer, a manufactured home, a mobile home and a condo are not a house. They are places to live home but not a house. Condo is a glorified apartment. well to be fair I have to be disagree with Dave. if wasn't because of the mom they would not have the condo in the first place she did invest $90,000. I say if you sale it will have $425,000 . Give her $125,000 then leaves you with $300,000 and avoid making any future deals with anybody else.

[@kynroebri4347]

She is going to divorce the son in a few years (because of his relationship with his mom) and get paid out half of the equity in the NEW home they purchase. BUT the son is not willing to pay HALF to his mother. I Hate to sound pessimistic but I have seen similar situations ESPECIALLY in California.

[@fhuber7507]

How is it TITLED? Her co-signing doesn't mean she's the titled co-owner. If it is titled in mother and son's names, she's HALF OWNER. The split may not be what this caller thinks.

[@BirdDogey1]

This is a common marriage scam in California. She will divorce him and take half or more of the equity from property he owned before the marriage.

[@rochellearthur1395]

Profits should be split proportionally to the principal payments made. Ie she has 100k in the game, was worth 250k, so they put in 150k so all profits should be split 40% and 60%

[@JaykAnderson]

People are assuming they only paid 100k for the property. If mom only put in the first 90k and the son and wife paid 200k over 10 years things change

[@brittanyblonde9005]

I hate when Dave has to coax information out of someone.....freaking annoying! They should give the entire rundown immediately. Then when Dave puts all the information together, they're like "Right!" Like he should've known the whole story before they get on the line. Why do people do this?

[@TrevForPresident]

This lady thinks she's going to give her mother in law her exact $90k 2008 investment dollars back and that will be the end of it? She helped her son out now do right by the mom.

[@XxxX-ln9js]

ok so mom "invested" $90k and the son "invested" $10k, mom was also thinking she would use the condo for a stream of income once it was paid off but mom also wants to be paid back the initial $90k investment. They also never mentioned the purchase price of the condo and we don't know if mom was responsible for the mortgage payments as well or if she just helped with the down payment.

[@setha360]

Divorce planning, for her new house, he owned it prior to getting married probably, scheming ,,,,

[@Tuskenknits]

I think the mom probably wants some of that equity from selling the house. They may have to split it to make her happy. Or wait until they completely pay her off, then sell it.

[@dportal844]

It seems to me that the mom should get half the profits.

[@gottasay1157]

Wrong, mother/parent help child to get a start on a home, Nothing to do with wife. Get your own money/ get your own down payment with husband. If it wasn't for their property together, you wouldn't be talking. Get your own money.