'AITA for letting my mother have a copy of the key to our home despite my wife's objection?'

"AITA for letting my mother have a copy of the key to our home despite my wife's objection?"

"Situation:"

I (M34) recently bought a one-story house. Note that it was purchased solely by me, my wife did not help save for it (I started saving for it before I even met here) and it's in my name.

When my parents threw us a party for this happy occasion, mom asked for a copy of the key in case of an emergency. I let her have it which made my wife upset. She didn't say anything at the time but she waited til we were alone and started arguing with me saying I shouldn't have let my mother have a copy of the key. I said 'why?!'

Since my mother is known to respect privacy and is a very trusted member in the family. She said that she does not feel 'comfortable' with the idea of someone else, who's not a resident, having a copy of the key. She also brought up how my mother didn't pay a penny towards the house so this should 'disqualify her' from getting the key.

I said it was not a big deal, but she kept persisting saying I need to take the key back. Quite frankly, this had me fuming. I pointed out that I'm the one who bought the house and it's my decision to decide who gets to have a copy of the key end of story.

She screamed at me saying that 'technically' she did contribute towards the house savings back when she used to pay for our rent and daily expenses while I saved money. I told her that she was acting as if I put my mom's name on the title which's ridiculous but she said that I have no respect for her opinions and keep undermining her input.

We've been going back and forth on it since then. She's now 'letting me know' that if I don't take the key back then she'll do it herself. I think she's being irrational and unreasonable acting like that over a copy of the house key. This decision I made could save us in case of an emergency but she kept downplaying it.

E.T.A I think it's crucial to mention that there's no conflict between my mother and my wife. They're on near perfect terms, alright? I thought that I've already established that above.

From the comments:

SnooDrawings1480 writes:

Yta. She paid all your expenses while you saved and she's not even on the title to the house? She's right, she did contribute.

outsidepr writes:

I wonder if OP knows that, assuming this is a community property country, that his wife indeed does own 50% of that house whether he likes it or not

Tatunkawitco writes:

Holy …..! The wife’s name is not on the house?!!! Oh that’s a deal breaker.

LarkspurSong writes:

It would be for me as well, assuming the house was bought while they were married and there isn’t a very unique, very compelling reason for the wife to not want her name on the house.

OP hasn’t offered any explanation aside from what’s in the original post so I can only conclude he’s a controlling AH who took advantage of his wife to buy a home in his name alone and is now holding that over her. A real prize, truly.

SeriousContact5921 writes:

It’s okay she can just divorce him and take him for half of everything since apparently he don’t understand marriage.

SplintersApprentice writes:

Came here to say this. For him to have sole ownership over the home, despite her paying for their rent and daily expenses while he “saved money” is his way of having full control over their living circumstances today.

Would he have been able to save for the home if she wasn’t covering their rent and living expenses? Would she have been able to contribute to the down payment if she weren’t covering all these costs?

There’s a lot of crucial details OP isn’t giving, but from this info alone it makes him look greedy at best and abusive and controlling at worst

Easy_Application_822 writes:

Yes but it doesn't work that way. If they divorce, he's still going to have to buy her out of the house. Source: my divorce. Poor ex hubby was so upset his little trick didn't work. He had to go to a 30 year mortgage to pay me off!! The horror....

delkarnu writes:

Yup, he took preexisting assets (his savings before they were married), mixed them with shared assets (money saved as a couple), and created a 100% shared asset.