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.

I presume you're being facetious, but in case you aren't 😉, I should point out that you can't leave money etc. to someone who hasn't been born or even conceived yet. When my DH's widowed father died, the will was shared four ways among DH and his two sisters, with the remaining quarter being divided among the four grandchildren, two of which were DH's and mine, two his elder sister's (his other sister is childless).

Two months after he died I conceived our third DC, so to make things fair DH made up the same amount that our older two DC had received, from his own share of the will.

This is precisely why the parent needs to make a will - the not making a will is already causing tensions.

I would say unless there is a will that specifies the how the estate should be divided (or a wish from the parent that is known of and written down somewhere else), then the estate should be split equally between the children of those that have died.
If they then choose to split their share between their children (the grandchildren) is up to them).

Sibling A is a chancer. I would split 50/50 if I was sibling A or B.

Unless there is a will stating otherwise, split 50/50 between the siblings the grandchildren will get their inheritance one day from their own parents.

It should be split between siblings, it doesn’t matter matter whether anyone has two kids or ten. If my parents house was sold, I wouldn’t expect my sister to get more just because she has two kids and and me and my other sister only have one each. Also, how well off either sibling isn’t relevant.

Cheeky sibling. It should be an equal split between the 2 siblings

Split as the will dictates is the right thing to do.

Eye watering cheek and entitlement. Why should you be deprived of some of your legal inheritance because a sibling wants some for their kids? Ffs, that's not on. Let them give their kids some of their inheritance. Cheeky bastard.

Sibling A is a grasping cunt.

Not sure I'd be that interested in avoiding the "fallout" with grabby sibling A if I was B... Clearly they are not a very nice person and I would feel they had already damaged the relationship.

A/B 50/50 nothing else an option

Split equally between siblings and then it is each siblings decision what they do with their share!
I definitely think sibling A is being grabby and greedy.

Yes it did seem somewhat unfair; our cousin is child free and wealthy whereas there are five children between me and my siblings, all of whom are going to need help and it does seem somewhat bonkers that our wealthy child free cousin will ultimately end up with half Granny’s estate whereas the other half will ultimately be split between three families

What exactly is unfair about this?
Grannys estate should go to Grannys children

Sibling A is CF trying to get more for their family because they have 2 kids. They can split their 50% between their own kids if they want, they have no right take take from sibling B.

This seems wild to me. If the property has already been equally between the two siblings, really unfair of sibling A to try to pressure her sibling into giving away part of her inheritance. Sibling A chose to have two children and therefore to split resources between 2 children. Completely different if the grandparents chose to leave the property equally split between their 3 grandchildren, but this is not what happened.

I would split it equally between sibling A and sibling B. The number of grandchildren isn't really relevant.

This.

Another vote for 50/50. If you have divided it according to children, what happens if either sibling has further children AFTER the financials are complete?

Also, if sibling B eventually ends up with more grandchildren than sibling A, will sibling A pay them some of the money back to "make it fair"? Somehow, I don't think so.

50/50 spilt between the siblings 100%.

If there is a will, do what the will says. If there is no will, abide by the intestacy rules.

As descendent of an estate where randchildren counted instead of children, this did and will do permanent irreparable damage to the family.
If the parent is yet to die perhaps the single mother should get pregnant again? Perhaps several times, no?
It is up to the person making the will, of course, and it would not be unreasonable to make specific gifts to the grandchildren, but unless they have reasons they want to obviously and blatantly favour/hurt one daughter over the other the main estate must split equally or near as possible between them.

Split 50/50 for sure.

Not worth pondering a will is a will for a reason. I presume you are sibling B? You cannot pressure your sibling because you had less children and have less money. Maybe your parents assisted you before? What happens is you win the lottery anx you suddenly are the wealthiest or is sadly your sibling is in an accident and loses everything are you going to give them something? F do as the will state, move on