Apparently I am, for spending more money on my DD than my DSD..

[hilarydoe]

WW3 at home, apparently I am being unreasonable because both our girls (my dd and my DSD who stays with us every other weekend) needed wardrobe overhauls. DH and I decided that we'd spend around £80 each because money's been a bit tight recently because his hours have decreased.

Anyway, I recently signed up to very.co.uk and got a rather large credit limit. I decided that as my DD hasn't been treated much recently I would blow the budget and ended up spending around £300 on her new wardrobe

I didn't think it was a big deal as it's no actual outlay of money yet! and I got it on "pay nothing for 12 months" so we can pay it off monthly with no interest for the year. Bless her, DD even said she's use some of her pocket money to pay it off each month as there was one thing she really wanted that I didn't think was that essential. (Damn Superdry!)

Anyway, I've started WW3. DSD is sulking because her clothes aren't as nice as DDs and she didnt get as treated as DD did.

I think I might be being a bit unreasonable but I don't think I deserve this lashing!

Yes, it works in that sense. (I would never have assumed fair to be on a par with equal, though)

spuddy if that is the case then DH should spend 100% on his daughter as DD is not his biological child. The OP should spend 100% on her own daughter and none for DSD.

DamnBamboo - "Can I actually ask, what is wrong with buying more clothes for the child who will, err need more clothes, given that this is her only source of clothing anywhere, and she doesn't have another wardrobed in another house to use a well."

That's not the case though.

The OP's DH is not her daughters father, he is her stepfather. Her father lives elsewhere and so she may well have a second wardrobe at his house too. OP says she is with her father for visits so not at home with her and her DH 100% of the time.

Both girls presumably have maintenance paid for them by their fathers and the OP and her DH agreed a budget between them, for both girls, which should have taken maintenance payments into account if those maintenance payments were going to be a consideration for one girl getting more spent on her than the other.

It would be impractical to expect both girls to get everything the same down to the last penny when they do not live together but for big purchases like this it would be more sensible and fair to stick to a similar budget, especially once it has been discussed and agreed.

I can't believe that people don't realise you do actually pay interest with very - its just that they bump the price up instead and then say you get it interest free.

Plus of course massive interest if you don't pay it off in time.

I have two DDs who are both my blood daughters ( isn't there a film called that?!!) and I don't spend exactly the same on both, especially as there is a five year age differene between them, but I try to make it fair - both get a top, ok dd2 might want a sparkly one at a tenner and dd1 a Superdry tshirt but to them it's the same thing and what they wanted iykwim?

I wouldn't buy dd2 massive volume of things to make it the same value. I think that's fair enough?

Missed that bit noonesgoing. I didn't realise this.

OP, you have you each have one child on whom you spend money on. Your DD (DH DSD) and his DD (your DSD).

You've cocked up OP.

Although I still think if OPs DD rarely sees her dad (so will not have many clothes there) then she should still get a bit more.

Totally missed that too noone. Agree with damn in that case.

I don't know if you have.

I buy all of DS's clothes. thats what ex pays maintenance for.

They have bought him the odd item but its been crap which I didn't like anyway.

I really wouldn't want the ex and his wife picking his clothes they have no taste

How old are they?

DD's nearly 14. Since September she has had a Johnnie B Fleece, a pair of skinny jeans, two long sleeved tops, 1 pair of shoes, a couple of pairs of pyjamas and two school blouses. Probably about £240 (and the two school blouses were £45). We don't buy on tick or need to. I'm afraid I think YABU.

'mathanxiety. Why do you think op's DH's idea that fairness trumps most other considerations is unreasonable'

Yes, sorry -- I meant fairness in the sense of equal amount for each girl.

I agree that the DH and his exW should pay for their DD's clothes, and that the OP and her exH should pay for their DD's clothes. I think the DH here is trying to play happy families and indulge in the notion that the two girls should therefore receive equal monetary expenditure. I don't think it is fair to the OP's DD to pander to that idea as she will need more clothes since she spends more time in the home. His DD doesn't spend all her time there by any means, and she also has a mother who presumably spends money on her clothes.

Err...I totally disagree with the DSD should get the same idea!! When my DD visits her dad overnight or goes away with him, I as her mother provide her wardrobe!! I would never expect her father, who pays maintenance to also provide her wardrobe!!!
Have some pride people!!
This is not the DSD's issue, she's obviously been raised this way. I just don't see how anyone can expect a parent who pays to keep their child to also provide a full wardrobe, holidays, toys etc while maintaining a second family.
I might be wrong but I couldn't live with myself knowing my daughter expected that much away from home.

I don't see the problem, bar the buying on credit.
Dd needs clothes 7 days a week, dsd for two days.

I agree Andired -- I don't like the fact that the DSD's nose is out of joint here because she got less spent on her and that her clothes are of 'lesser' quality, and that the father seems to think the sulking of a child should be taken seriously. The bad feelings can be partly explained by the fact that she had been led to believe that both the girls would have the same amount spent on them, but that in itself signals an unhealthy dynamic in the home, with the DSD being set up to equate money spent on her being equal to whether she is welcome there or what her footing there is.

'DSD is sulking because her clothes aren't as nice as DDs and she didnt get as treated as DD did.' The DSD needs to be told to get over herself and not to sulk. The DH needs to stop indulging unacceptable behaviour on the part of his DD and not let her come between him and the OP. He should be falling over himself giving the appearance of not taking sides. I may come across as old fashioned here, but I think a Thank You would be in order when £80 has been spent on you. Instead she comes across as grabby and spoiled. This is always the fault of parents.

I think the children here are running rings around the adults.

DSD and DS need a bit of help with what constitutes "nice clothes". Since when has Top Shop and Primark been bad shops for fashion anyway.They have great stuff?

There are tons of outlet places - our nearest one has Superdry and Jack Wills and clothes are all much cheaper. You could get lots for £80!

Whatever way you look at it there has been a cock up by the op. one got designer clothes from the combined budget the other got cheaper budget clothes, not on

Well, you now realize that you were unreasonable and showed favouritism.

The question is, how can you fix this mistake?

If you analyse the scenario it speaks volumes. Definitely favouritism , obviously dd is op dd and will treat her a bit different, but you have to be careful when dealing with children, she could have handled it in abetter way

If I was the OPs dh I would be pissed off she spent £300 on clothes when that wasn't the agreement.