inheritance - what's fair, what's right?

[ForGladOtter]

Hypothetical (not really) situation and I just would like others' take on it:

Two siblings inherit their parents' property which is now for sale. Sibling A is married with two children and is comfortably off. Sibling B is married with one child and is less financially well off. Sibling A would like the proceeds of the sale to be split three ways between the grandchildren. Sibling B would prefer a 50/50 split with the sibling. Sibling A thinks Sibling B is depriving the grandchildren of an equal share. Sibling B feels they are having to give up some their entitlement in favour of Sibling A's children. (Sibling B feels they also have more need of the financial windfall than Sibling A. It is acknowledged that their own circumstance is not the responsibility of the other. But it does feed into how they feel about the request for the 3-way split).

I would love to hear others' thoughts on this.

Split between the siblings.

It's been divided equally between the siblings. If Sibling A wants to divide their share between their own kids, that's their choice.

Sibling B should not get a 1/3 of the estate instead of half. That's ridiculous. A is hugely entitled.

Hell no…
split 50/50 let the parents give some to their kids if they want
what a bloody cheek

Split between the siblings then they can split from there

Split between siblings and sibling A can give their share to their kids.

It was left to the siblings, it should be split as intended between the siblings.

A and B each take their 50% and do with it what they choose. The kids are irrelevant in this.

What's fair is what the parents want. You say the siblings inherited the property. So that's it. Split two ways. Sibling A can give her share to her kids if she likes but Sibling B should not feel guilty about receiving her share as prescribed by the parents' wishes.

It should be divided as the will states, 50/50 between the siblings.

If there's a will, split accordingly. If intestate, it splits at the closest living class of kin, so 50 50 between the two siblings. The grandchildren are irrelevant.

50/50 to A and B.
A can then do as she likes with her share.

Edit - with a caveat, that if A and B are middle aged-ish or less. If A and B were both over 70, and not desperate for money, it makes sense to skip a generation but still 50/50 to A’s kids/B’s kids.

Split between the siblings is what I would feel is fair and right. I assume that's what the parents intended also, as you say "two siblings inherit..."

If sibling A wants to split their share between their kids, they are free to do so. They're not free to demand sibling B gives up any of theirs.

Of course the inheritance should be divided equally between the two siblings unless their parents’ wills say otherwise. It’s not for sibling A to dictate how the money is split.

The first sentence says the siblings inherited the property which is now for sale. The siblings, not the grandchildren. 50/50 between the siblings. If A wants their 50% to go to their children they can do that. They can not dictate what B does with their 50%.

50:50 split and sibling A is a right CF. Of my two surviving siblings, I have more children, while DB has more grandchildren. it's not relevant. My parents have written their wills to make sure my DN, who is the child of my sister who died before them, doesn't lose out - that's different though.

This. Then it’s upto them what they do with itb

It should be divided as stipulated by the parents/grandparents in their will. What did the will say?

Split between the siblings.

What happens if another child is born or adopted...Does A expect that the inheritance should be redistributed?

The executors job is to divide the proceeds as the will directs. Anything other than that is illegal.

There's nothing stopping A giving part of her inheritance to her kids once it's been disbursed. She cannot expect B to do the same.

Whatever the will said- sounds like 50-50. If no will, follow the intestacy rules (assuming you’re in England or Wales)- also 50-50.

A is a cheeky fucker.

Sibling A is a CF. The money should be split between siblings. If grandparent wanted them GCs to have equal shares, they’d have left it directly to the GCs.

Obviously 50/50 between the siblings. Then it’s up to each sibling what they do with their 50%.

The siblings have inherited it - so split 50/50 between them. Either sibling may go on to have more children in the future - or one of the children may go on to have their own children thus dividing the inheritance further - who knows?! So the number of children at this moment in time is irrelevant.
Actually neither is the siblings current financial situation either relevant. The property was left to the siblings so to me this is really straight forward.

Split between sibling. It was your parents business and choice to have two children and you should both inherit 50/50. It's your sisters business and choice to have two children and so reduce any potential inheritance for them each in future, and they will inherit her estate 50/50. If shes that worried she can invest her inheritance from the house for their future.

There is no need to devolve the total across the three grandchildren, their time will come.

Legally and morally - 50%/50% split between the siblings. Assuming the first sentence means that the two siblings inherited the house equally.