What is the ruling regarding a financially well-off father not spending on his household and on the marriage of his children who are of marriageable age, coupled with his shortcomings in assisting his wife, and is this considered stinginess?

It is not permissible for the husband to restrict the maintenance of his wife; he must spend on her in a reasonable manner. If he does not, she is permitted to take from his wealth what suffices her. The father is obligated to provide maintenance for his young children. Scholars have differed regarding the obligation of providing for the marriage of an adult son. The preponderant opinion is that it is not obligatory, but it is commendable to assist them in marriage as an act of kindness. Filial piety towards the father does not cease, even if he falls short in providing maintenance or assisting with marriage.