I wonder if they could just sell the house and move?
Wow. Part of me feels sorry for the parents. The other part is sorry for us, society. What’s going on in this 30 year old’s head, thinking he has the right to keep living at his parents’ house without contributing anything? article mentions his parents say he has a spotty work history. Wonder what kid of an attitude he had at work?
gotta also wonder about the mention of “weapons.” How on earth did he fund them, given his spotty work history?
The young man sounds amazingly entitled—not contributing in any way to the household, yet he has a car and weapons and who knows what else.
I hope it’s mere entitlement rather than a mental illness. Sounds, at least, incredibly narcissistic.
My BIL did this, but my MIL liked having him there, so there was technically no problem. She died when he was 33 and his other brothers sold the house. He figured it out, more or less.
That’s sad as heck isn’t it?
I’ve lost track of the number of times Dr. Phil has done a show interviewing a family in just this same predicament.
There was a post recently on a completely unrelated topic were is came out that an employeed 20 something, living at home felt their parents should still be buying thier clothes! I thought that was bad until I read this article. I really think it’s important to set up clear expectations for our kids about what parental support will be provided as they get older. For some like @VeryHappy 's BIL things just “work” and everyone’s happy.
When my kids where younger I thought they’d graduate from college and move on, maybe coming home for temporary support if needed. Now that they are actually away or starting to leave, I’ve re-thought things. I’ve now told the kids that if they find a job near by they are welcome to move back home to they can save money for a house or condo, if they get married suposses are welcome too. We’ll have a list of things parents we pay for and things they’ll need to cover so there is no question as to what’s expected. Not as detailed as Sheldon’s roommate agreement but something along those lines.
I can’t imagen the tenstion in that house or what it’s like living with people that don’t want you there.
Well, MIL and BIL were happy. The other brothers, not so much. It was definitely a failure to launch situation.
Well, this looks like a situation where the parents have managed to mess things up for themselves by not seeking legal advice. Obviously the son did.
NY Law is this: if the parents had charged the son rent, then it would be an ordinary tenancy and the son could be evicted like any other tenant, with a 30 day notice. (Or shorter if there is a failure to pay rent or curable breach of the rental agreement).
But if the son does not pay rent and occupies as a family member, then it has to be a ejectment, with 6 months notice:
The parents in this case messed up by sending a series of inconsistent letter, none of which was a clearly stated notice tied to approproate legal time frames. First there was a letter telling the son to leave in 14 days;, then a second letter telling him to leave immediately but apparently giving him a date 30 days down the line. Apparently the parens went to court and the son got legal advice, and has done what any competent NY tenant’s lawyer would advise him to do - object to the improper notice.
It’s unfortunate for the parents that that NY law requires 6 months notice for an ejection action… but when it comes down to it this is a fairly straightforward legal situation. If they had given 6 months’ notice back in February, they’d be stuck with the son in the house until August… but they’d win their case in court.
And at least in New York, this case is an illustration of why parents really should charge their adult children rent, even if only a nominal amount.
The above is good advice, but how sad is it that any parent has to worry about taking their own child to court?
The court might give him six months, but also charge his a reasonable rent and utilities charge for those 6 months.
It may be sad, but not all that unusual for a family to need to go to court to resolve an intra-family problem.
I am also in NYS. Years ago, we took SIL to court to evict her from MIL’s house because she was abusive to her mom. It took months and she filed an assault charge against H, which wound up in Family Court and was very upsetting because he could have lost his law license but it was dismissed and she was evicted. Flash forward 10 years - MIL has let SIL back in and now when she complains about her, I say, we got rid of her once, you are stuck with her. I am not going through another year of that horror show. MIL will be 94 and SIL 65 on their next birthdays. I am now working on moving my oldest son and his gf into MIL’s house. The gf will be working as a health aide and their presence should help keep MIL safer.
My middle boys, 21 and 23, also live at home. The plan is for them to get actual jobs over the summer and then start paying me rent. I don’t mind them being here but I feel saddened at their failures to launch. They do not appear to be as entitled as the son in the article.
I think that 21 and 23 are totally appropriate ages to still be home. I know that you, like me, are on Long Island… you know that the rental of anything close to respectable is incredibly high. I can’t imagine how young kids can get out on their own and still eat anything more expensive than ramen noodles.
I’m glad you found a solution for MIL that will protect her from her own bad choices.
It must be so very hard to see someone you love become the kind of person in the OP.
Taking family members to court is surely a last resort and sad for all parties, but sometimes necessary. This young man OP posted about will have burnt all his bridges.
My family went through something similar with an ex-brother in law who did not pay the very inexpensive, agreed upon rent for years.
My grandparents waited until the youngest great-grandchild was 18 before going to court to get him evicted. Grandmother was suffering from dementia and grandfather started declining, and he was afraid of grandmother being taken advantage of after he died.
Going to court when they did was an amazing gift because my grandfather died shortly after. My mom would have been the one to deal with the mess and it would have got much uglier.
The children were unaware that their great-grandparents had put a roof over their head and paid all utilities for most of their lives in order to give try to give them a stable life in a nice, safe environment. When they had to move, they were filled with hate and blamed everyone but their dad. Meanwhile, BIL moved in with a well-off widow down the street.
It sounds like a soap opera but there was a lot of real life suffering.
The son has lost his mind if he thinks he is entitled to stay. The parents should be able to put his stuff outside and change the locks, particularly after multiple written requests to move. But they probably won’t get away with it and will have to file an ejectment action on their on ungrateful son and have the Sheriff put him out.
Yes, they can indeed put the house up for sale subject to the tenancy that may or may not be created jurisdictionally (since he is their son) and move, but goodness, have we fallen so far that we find this a reasonable action for parents to take when their children refuse to honor them? Just a rhetorical question.
Several things could be going on here, none of which are pleasant to contemplate: the son might have a mental illness or a personality disorder, be engaging in emotional, physicial, and financial abuse, or some combination. The parents might be afraid of him. I would be if a family member lived with me, didn’t want to move out, and owned weapons.