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.

Absolute rubbish to split between the grandkids!

50/50 between the children and then they can choose what to do with their share. How are people so selfish and narrow minded!

Funny how the unreasonable party in this sort of situation can never see themselves as grabby and unreasonable.

I have just been sole executor for my Mum who left her money to her grandchildren - shared equally - nothing to her children. (We all have homes and are not in need). My sister and brother removed lots of items (I was supposed to dispose of property as I wished) without asking me. My sister sold everything she took - she felt entitled to it as she was annoyed - having being horrible to my Mum for her whole life. The money should really have gone into the estate so effectively she was stealing from her own children and nephews and nieces. My brother said it was an "outrageous" thing to do!!
People are entitled - whatever the circumstances! The money was my Mum's and it was up to her to do what she wanted with it. I could have "disposed" of all the property by giving it to me - but as the youngest, and the closest to my Mum it would seem I have the least sense of entitlement. I wonder why??

50/50 split.

I have seen a family torn apart over missing a generation and giving money to grandchildren.

I wonder if A would be so keen on this if the less wealthy sibling had more children.

This.

With bells, whistles and a cherry on top.

It’s 50:50 - she’s a cheeky mare. Money brings out the worst in people.

Definitely split 50/50 between the two siblings.

50/50 split between the siblings

These threads are always so funny and show why inheritance is such a minefield!

A isn't necessarily a 'c*nt' or grabby and B isn't 'entitled' to any particular share.

What's 'right' is whatever is stipulated in the will (and sadly, it seems, the problem is that there isn't/ won't be one in this case). What's considered 'fair' is irrelevant really as it's the dying parents choice as to how to leave their money.

Some grandparents cut their kids completely and leave it all to grandchildren. My ILs are planning to split it very unevenly between the 3 siblings on the basis that they have previously given large sums for houses to two of their children.

Sometimes dying parents have verbally promised inheritance splits which can't be proven without a will.

My aunt and uncle left nothing to one adult child as he was a drug addict who would have blown through it in a matter of days/ weeks!

This
It is exactly what our parents did……..up to us how we shared it with our own children

This totally!

Sibling A seems to be saying that they don't personally need the money and so wants a big grab for their own children. Unless Sibling B is in complete agreement, leave it for the parents to give money to the children.

I suggest that sibling A be told to do what my DH did. (Real life example). MIL (DH mother) died a few years ago leaving equally to all children. We are fairly comfortable and wanted our children to benefit for house purchase etc. Being mindful of tax implications if we gave them money, we had a solicitor draw up a "Deed of Variation" which allocated money to the children. That had the effect of them inheriting as though they were named in the Will (inheritance tax liability did not change) and we were able to give them as much as we wanted without us paying tax on the money as well. DH's siblings had never heard of such a thing and decided to make similar arrangements themselves.

The simplest and most obvious answer is always best when it comes to money and family, to avoid complications and fall outs later. So of course a 50/50 split is best although your surviving parent transferred the house to you and your sibling and I think they would have had to specify the share of the house for each of you?

Sibling A can jog on - CF

Equal share between the siblings. What happens if more grandchildren are born? Do they deserve nothing because of having the misfortune of not being there to meet their grandparents. It goes to the siblings then it’s up to them how they spend it or filter it through the family over the years regardless of how well each sibling is doing financially. Unless the grandparents started differently in their will of course.

The more you post, the more it sounds like specific legal advice is needed to avoid any tax issues, as well ownership issues.

Assuming the property is owned equally between two siblings, each sibling gets half each and then does what they want with their own share.

A is being greedy, I’ve never come across an uneven split dependent on grandchildren. Plus the number of grandchildren or great grandchildren could change so 50/50 between A and B is the only fair way.

Split equally between the siblings. What if A had 5 kids? And who knows if B would later have more kids? Just now they have one but things might change when they get a partner. So the only fair way to split is equally between siblings and then they can give to their children as they please. A is extremely entitled and needs to stop being greedy.

My mum mentioned recently amending her will to give a set amount to each of her 6 GC. She said she knows I will give my 3 some anyway, but my brother is quite tight (and to be fair, needs the money, as I do really) so she is thinking of amending it. She would never cut out her 2 DC and give direct to GC. I think if the children want to give it straight to the next generation, they share their share.

Split between the two siblings. Grandchildren don’t come into it at this stage. It is the for the parents to leave whatever to their children

50/50 split.
One of my siblings once got more inheritance than me because, I assume, at the time of the will writing, she was the only one with a child. Fast forward I actually had 3 children and she still only had one 1 but she got more inheritance….
It didnt bother me as it wasn’t inheritance I was expecting so I very grateful to receive anything. But I do think 50/50 split is better irrelevant of their situations as situations can change and it’s the only fair way.

My brother has 4 children and I have 2, if he said we had to divide it between his kids I would be fuming! He chose to have 4 kids! The split should be 50/50 between the 2 siblings and then they give some to their grandchildren if they want to.

What if a sibling is only comfortably off because they have scrimped and saved all their life?
What if a sibling is not well off because they have never worked and blown any money they have on cigarettes and booze ? 😜

Being 'entitled' to more because you have less is silly and not relevant in law.

Grandparents often want to give grandchildren money as they want to ensure the security and comfort of the 'family line'...

The OP really should try to convince the parent to make a will though...

You say you are not looking for what is correct in the eyes of the law but if there is no will the law states that it will be split equally between siblings.

If there is no will it won’t be your decision to make or to “Decide what you think is best.”

NOT YOUR CHOICE! IT WILL BE A LEGAL DECISION! Listen to posters! They know what they are talking about!

No. A is a greedy ass.