Giving Money for Deposit on Home to Children

It sometimes seems however hard we try parents can never get it right!!!!

When our eldest daughter wanted to buy a flat in London we gave her the deposit, but were named as co-owners. As suggested by J52 on page 1.
She didn't have a steady job at the time, but we thought the flat she chose was a real bargain and worth the investment.
Later, when she was more settled and changed to a better job she sold it for quite a big profit and paid us back.
Our other children, who were all married by then with their own homes knew about it but didn't mind.

Not much use to the OP but we found that the secret to success was to start as early as possible. We put down the deposit on a 2 bed Glasgow tenement flat for DD1 when she was 17 and off to Uni. Her mortgage, us as Guarantors. She rented out the biggest room as a bed sit and that was sufficient to cover the mortgage and she + flatmate shared the bills. Later she went to London to work for a year but only rented a 'big cupboard with a bed'. Meanwhile DD2, was living in the Glasgow flat with a flatmate while she attended College.

DD2 then went to Uni in Newcastle and her big sister returned to work in Glasgow, this time with a live-in boyfriend. We again stumped up the deposit for a 2 bed flat for DD2 where she lived happily for 3 years. Unfortunately house prices fell in Newcastle so that flat was sold at a loss but shortly after DD2 returned to Glasgow to work DD1 decided to sell her flat and got nearly 10x the original price. She gave her sister enough for a deposit in Glasgow from the profits and bought herself a house near us.

Both daughters have now moved to old cottages (just like our house) but the initial deposits got them on the housing ladder before they were 20 and have allowed them to pay a big deposit = small mortgage on their subsequent houses. Apart from the 1 year in London, neither of them has ever paid rent and they are both (in their 40's) on track to be mortgage free soon.

Sorry to go on at such length but the moral of this story is that a small amount given to the DC early on is better than stumping up a huge deposit for a family home later. I think that owning their own, albeit small home from an early age, made my DDs more responsible, given that they had to budget for a mortgage/insurance, had part-time work throughout their studies and did a lot of DIY to maintain & upgrade their properties.

oh boy this resonates with me. Back in the early 1970s my mother 'lent' my sister £30,000 to help buy a London flat. My sister was unmarried and my mother was anxious that she should have some financial security. In her will she stipulated I should have the first £30,000of her estate. But she only died a couple of years ago, so that £30,000 (to allow for inflation etc) should in reality have been a sum that would have been more than her entire estate. Worse than that my sister tried to say the £30,000 is worth much less now than then and could not get her head around the maths. I tried to say that if we had had access to £30,000 in 1970 we would have had a very different property or lifestyle than the pretty hand to mouth existence that we did have. But as I did not want a major family row, I agreed to split the estate 50/50 and forget the 'loan' but it still rankles I can tell you. Be very very careful.

I think it is extremely important to treat each child equally, after all, why should one child be penalised for being better off financially than the other. Also, you don't know what will happen in the future with your DD, the financial sector can be very volatile. Equally, your DSs financial position could vastly improve in the future. I agree with janeainsworth that you should make it an interest free loan, rather than a gift, and make a provision that the amount of the loan should be given to your DD before remaining assets shared. That way, you are helping your DS when needed but your daughter will be treated fairly. If you feel your DD wouldn't be bothered she could always decline the amount of the loan and just split 50/50 what's left.

It is difficult to strike a balance between openness and confidentiality, especially where the siblings have different needs and are not the best of friends.

Our two understand and accept that neither of them knows all about our financial dealings with the other, just that it's 'fair' to the best of our ability. We have helped both in different ways at different times.

We have no way of knowing whose needs will be greatest as time goes by - perhaps our own.

Only when you look back from the Pearly Gates will you know what would have been 'fair'.

Not a lot of help - but I have told my children to forget "Equal" and would always go for "fair". If one earns eyewatering salary, why help them - they can get "stuff" from you over the years, perhaps first chice. theo ther needs help now . Whatever you do will cause ructions, and accusations of favouritism.

Discuss your decision with your offspring, but tell them that it is YOUR money, so it is immaterial how you spend it!

, go for it!

I haven't read all the comments but wanted to say how things have been in our family. When my mum was alive we had a time that we were desperate to move but couldn't afford to. She gave us some money to help, discussed it with me and my brother and trusted us to sort it out with our inheritance from her when the time came. Which we did quite amicably.
We have helped both our daughter's. One at a time, being open and discussing with them both. They've now both had same money with provision that it had to be spent on housing.
We had to sign a letter to say the money was a gift and that we held no stake in the house.