[ansley]

A friend (F) asked for my opinion and I really don't know what to tell her. So, I am asking ya'll.

F's child (P) has moved back in and wants to bring in P's SO (B) and B's 2 children. B has stolen money and meds from F in the past and will not take care of the 2 children. So, F would end up doing it when she isn't working. F wants to please P so she has agreed for B to move back in. F asked me how to split the bills. F asked if I thought it was fair to split it 5 ways for 5 people. I personally say you don't deal with family but this is a dilemma that she has decided to go with and would like advice on the best way to go about it.

Thanks.

 

[pat in east texas]

F needs to make definite rules - with zero tolerance.

 

[alotofgooddeals]

sounds like a big headache to me...

um... five adults living in the home.... or are some of these children... depending on the age of the children they may not have any income thus could not be included in the figuring of the bills...however i would run far away from this situation... very far and very fast..

 

[ansley]

I agree, ruuuuuuuuun.

She has decided to do this so what boundaries do you think would be helpful?

I suggested 3 checking accounts; 1 for bills with F and P's name and 1 each for personal spending. They need to agree on what will be paid out of the joint account.

2 are too young to work. I was thinking split the bills 3 ways (3 adults) and if P wants to pay B's share that is P's problem.

There are other things that I don't think F is thinking about. Who cooks or separate meals, who washes and puts away dishes, who does who's laundry, who cleans up after the toddler eats in every room of the house and etc. Little things but over time it gets aggravating.

Living situation cons are 1 bath, small kitchen, B doesn't want the kids to go to that school district and wants W (F's other child) to let them use her address for school and only 3 bedrooms (F would like her other grandchildren to visit over night). I am sure there are other things that just haven't shown up yet.

I want this to work out with the least amount of pain but I see nothing but arguments and heartaches on the horizon.

Thanks.

 

[Darlene]

B has stolen money and meds from F in the past and will not take care of the 2 children. So, F would end up doing it when she isn't working. F wants to please P so she has agreed for B to move back in.

That "woman" should not be in her house.
Just say no. She's gonna get burnt, I'm talking crispy, if she goes for it. What's with all these people doing crazy stuff to appease others? F should tell her kid NO. Too bad those kids have a wacko (B) for a Mom. Darn shame.:dis:

 

[Russ]

"Deals" or business dealings with realitives rarely work out.

So if this is a must, make it with strict WRITTEN rules! Not subject to one's own interpretations.

 

[alotofgooddeals]

you sound like you might have some good advice for her.

reading your post leads me to believe that you already have some sound advice for them...I would write down everything you have stated her on paper...add them as you think of them and maybe have a board that states what everyones responsibilities will be. I would maybe even draft up a paper and have everyone sign it stipulating what chores or what their contributions will be...and put a statement in there staying that things can be added or taken away at any time however everyone must agree. I know the paper sounds silly but at least they would have it in writing so if the time came she had to boot their butts out she could pull it out and show them at one time they all agreed and now someone is not doing what he or she needs to do...
For finances... i would figure up all the bills and have everyone disclose the amount that they are making verification could be check stub, bank statements or whatever allows the income to be verified. I mean if someone is making $500 a week while one is making $100 per week... then maybe it can be worked out that who is making the $500 a week be more responsible for the paying of the bills but the one who is making $100 a week be more responsible for the upkeep of the house... I really don't know the whole situation but if someone is wanting to move in with someone this leads me to believe that a financial crisis is involved...if not... I would most definitely say no...

 

[ansley]

P is the baby and F keeps telling me when my baby moves out I'll feel the same way.

Everything in writing sounds good to me.

P makes more than F and B gets all her money from the Gov and child support. The only financial strain is that P can't make enough $ for B. Before P lost her house she got F to co-sign on a loan to pay off all the credit cards B had maxed out. Then P said that while she was asleep B maxed the cards out again. That is the reason I think if P's company will do it, X amount should come out of P's check and go directly into the bill account. My co will but DH's won't.

 

[nodmicks]

no no no way!

 

[Russ]

this sounds like a disaster in the making IMO.

 

[alotofgooddeals]

P needs to tell F to get a job....

sorry.....however if F is old enough to pop out kids then she is old enough to go and get a job... sorry...it just sounds from what your typing that F does not work and collects whatever she can from welfare etc...This is not okay...and i dont understand why it is continued to be allowed... Don't get me wrong... i think it is a wonderful thing is someone needs it...but it shouldnt be used for a whole lifetime of support....I understand your friend feeling like she needs to help them out however this whole scenario sounds like in the long run it is only going to cause your friend more problems.

P is the baby and F keeps telling me when my baby moves out I'll feel the same way.

Everything in writing sounds good to me.

P makes more than F and B gets all her money from the Gov and child support. The only financial strain is that P can't make enough $ for B. Before P lost her house she got F to co-sign on a loan to pay off all the credit cards B had maxed out. Then P said that while she was asleep B maxed the cards out again. That is the reason I think if P's company will do it, X amount should come out of P's check and go directly into the bill account. My co will but DH's won't.

 

[ansley]

F is working (F stands for friend) and B isn't (b stands for b**ch). I may have confused the letters, sorry. I agree nothing but pain on the horizon here for everyone. Including F's grandchildren that are not allowed to visit while B is there.

I'll talk to F about the suggestions ya'll have made. She knows I don't think she should let B live there and she doesn't want B there but P is her baby.

 

[mek42]

If it's strictly an emotional caretaker decision why is the rest of this even an issue? If F is willing let thief B come back to mooch and steal some more to placate P for some crazy emotional enabling reason, why isn't F just woman enough to not delude herself and just float the whole cost of everything?

I think this has come out more harshly than I intend, but really, the correct answer should have been either, "No," "The grandkids can live here and I'll pay for them to eat, etc. until you two get things sorted out," or "If we do this, it will be a landlord situation not a family thing. Here is the contract and yes, B, it does state that a 2000% replacement cost will be paid for lost or stolen items of my personal belonings during your stay." This third option would be intended to let P & B make the "No," decision.

 

[monkeywrangler71]

There are 5 people, they should be splitting the bills 5 ways regardless of how many of them are old or capable enough for working. P is responsible for ensuring that 4 out of the 5 bill portions are paid to F. Splitting 3 ways means that F is left paying a third of the kid's bills, which is not her responsibility.

I'll not comment on the rest, since I'm currently living in my parent's house.

 

[mek42]

...

I'll not comment on the rest, since I'm currently living in my parent's house.

Presumably neither you nor anyone you have brought with you has an established habit of materially stealing from your parents. Fresh apples and rotten oranges - pretty sure your case is completely different.

 

[frugalfranny]

If it's strictly an emotional caretaker decision why is the rest of this even an issue? If F is willing let thief B come back to mooch and steal some more to placate P for some crazy emotional enabling reason, why isn't F just woman enough to not delude herself and just float the whole cost of everything?

Yeah that!!

Nothing but trouble coming up in her future........and losing more things, of course!

 

[krbshappy71]

Just a side note, B's welfare will change once they find out she is now sharing expenses with others. F should not risk fraud by allowing them to live there without properly notifying social services. Social services doesn't care who's responsibility it was to report it, they do care about all parties involved and living in the same household. They don't care that the other people are not related, they care that B would not be paying the same $amount in utilities and expenses of living than B reported initially upon receiving assistance.

If F points this out to B, they may reconsider moving in as B could lose some very valuable assistance such as medical or lowered food assistance. Just an FYI.

 

[Siebrie]

Hindsight: F should have raised P to become a mature person! They are now 'equals', not so much mum/son (daughter?).

Maybe laying down the rules and chores on paper, including the 'inform social services' will actually scare B off?

 

[greekislandgirl]

There are 5 people, they should be splitting the bills 5 ways regardless of how many of them are old or capable enough for working. P is responsible for ensuring that 4 out of the 5 bill portions are paid to F. Splitting 3 ways means that F is left paying a third of the kid's bills, which is not her responsibility.

I completely 1000% agree. If you bring 2 children into someone else's house, you are responsible for their share of the utilities, etc. If the electric bill was $20 before they showed up, and $100 after they showed up, why should F get stuck with an extra $13 (100/3-20)? That makes no sense and is totally unfair to F.

This sounds like a sticky situation all around. I hope it all works out for the best!

 

[ansley]

It is the stealing, drugs (don't know if she still does them or not), cussing (I don't mean conversational, no sh*it, but cuss you out because she didn't like the way you looked at her even though you had your head down reading a book) and laziness that makes F not want to bring B in. But it is what the baby wants.

F told me they could get around the fraud charge by saying they rented B a room. I asked about her eating the food stamp food and she said they couldn't get her for anything because she didn't sign anything or use the card. If asked she would just say that B bought the groceries and she didn't know B had used FS to get them.

I don't know how people get around these things. An engineer and his RN wife got medicade and wic for their 1st child and I (a factory worker) and my DH (making min wage at the time) missed medicade by $500 a yr (I can't remember how much on WIC) for our child.

I have given F the suggestions and now the ball is in her court. It is her house and her utilities. If they trash it or don't pay a penny she will have to deal with it.