To think DB is mean to be charging my DCs for a room we don't want in a holiday home

[TheReason]

DB has arranged weekend away for all of our family. We are meant to be splitting the cost.

There are 6 bedrooms in the house he is renting out. It's working out at approximately £200 per room as me, my DB and DSs are covering the costs of my parents room.

This is a lot of money for us as money is tight due to childcare costs. To be honest I wish we weren't going as we can't really afford it but we feel obliged.

We are the only ones with children.

DB booked the holiday home and - without asking us - decided our children need their own room. Our 2 year old actually sleeps in our bed all the time anyway. Our 6 year old sleeps in his own room at home - but, I would prefer he just squashed into our bed in the holiday home - as otherwise we're paying an extra £200 for him to sleep alone in a room. Chances are that our 6 yr old will end up in our room anyway as he often does and it wouldn't bother us at all.

DB has no children and has no understanding about what having children means.

DB texted me to tell me the breakdown of the cost and I saw that me and DH are having to pay twice what everyone other couple has pay as we have to pay for two rooms.

From DB's point of view he seems to think my DSs are 2 extra people that should be charged as anyone else attending is being charged.

From my point of view, I think it is mean to charge my DSs as adults. Of all the couples attending we actually have the least disposable income due to having the expenses of childcare etc.

If the roles were reversed and DB had children and I didn't - then I would expect that the cost would be divided out per adult.

When I was initially unsure about attending the holiday at all, DB made a big issue about how important it was that my DS's attend. Normally he pays them very little attention and is not really a great uncle for them. He calls over about once every 2 months even though he lives close by and has loads of free time. He seems to feel he has ticked some box by giving them a tiny bit of attention. He always buys them very very cheap presents even though he has no other nephews or nieces and has a very high income. All of this is entirely his choice but colours how I feel about him charging my DC's for a room they don't need

AIBU to think the cost of this holiday home should be divided per adult?

I was telling DH about this thread and reading out some of the posts
Sunday mornings used to be sex and all about us, now they are about 8 month old DS in our bed, DH trying to snooze and me on mnet

Anyway, his comment was 'It would never be 'fair' as such. It never is unless everyone has a partner and either the same number of children or none.' His point was that if, for example, one of your siblings were single and the others married, splitting it 4 ways would mean the single one paid more 25% when, in terms of people benefitting they would be just 1 out of 12.

But if you divide it by 4 you are benefitting in terms of you pay 25% and are a family of 4 out of 12.

But if you divide it by a number that includes the children, that seems harsh too as they are so small, particularly the 2 year old!

After some discussion about this I can't believe this is what our Sunday mornings have come to (and we are staying in a cottage at the moment but by ourselves ) we still think it should just be divided 4 ways.

What happens about food?

Liquorice not everybody in a party will have such views and won't want to spend their break( which they have paid for) worrying that they will be found out.I would have thought he person booking the apartment and using their credit card in particular wouldn't find such a set up favourable.

Most the people saying OP should pay 40% of the house rental are making points that don't apply, as OP keeps patiently pointing out.

(Ignore this question if you have already answered it) you've talked about the wealthy brother who booked the house a lot, but what about your other siblings. Could you recruit them to be sympathetic and help fight your case; if they are willing to each pay 25%, then Booking-brother is gonna look petty to be the only one in disagreement.

No one has said your sneaking extra people in - it's an extension of the 4 people to a bed scenario

Bloody hell - my nieces are coming to stay this week; they are family, I wouldn't in a million years dream of invoicing my brother for their food!

When they had a gite for a fortnight, they invited me to stay and didn't want any cash - just because we wanted to spend time together. I paid my way by buying some food, cooking, etc.

All this penny pinching; it is a gift for their parents, it is family, not a random collection of adults - it should be split by the 4 siblings and be done with it.

The confusion here is that as well as a gift, you are all also benefitting from the holiday. If you buy someone a gift that costs £800, you all pay £200 and hand it over, if you booked your parents a city break that cost £800, you'd all pay £200 and wave them off - however, in this scenario, you're all sharing in the gift as well

I think the fairest way to divide this up would be for you to divide the costs of the parents' room equally between siblings, each pay for the rooms that you're using (and, in this case, I think it was a fair assumption that you'd need two rooms), and for you to divide the food bills between the adults but for you to chip in a bit extra as you have more mouths to feed.

That's what we did when we went away as a family and I think everyone was happy!

I don't quite see why some people think that the cost of the kids should be shared amongst all the adults - I would generally expect parents to pay for their kids' share (which, at restaurants etc, will naturally be smaller than the adults).

I would also - as a side note - be wary about assuming 'tightness' for him not spending as much as you think he should on your kids. I don't spend much on my nieces and nephew right now because they're little and I don't see the point in expensive toys for small children who are equally happy with cheaper toys but I will consider spending more on them when they're older. I would not, however, be keen on doing so if their mother seemed to expect that that's where I should be spending my salary.

Actually from the home owner's perspective you would be sneaking people in if sleeping four to a bed had your DB opted for a house with fewer rooms to save ££. Houses are let at a cost per house and set up for the maximum capacity. As with most holidays, air travel etc. over twos should be paid for. I probably have less disposable income than my child free siblings but would never dream of expecting them to pay for my children, even though they are generous to their nieces, pay equally for them on meals out etc.

I wonder how your parents would feel about all of this? Doesn't bode well for a harmonious trip.

Notin the price would be the same whether the kids were there or not though - if OP leaves the kids with the other set of grandparents the price will be identical to the price if she brings them. The house was booked as there are 10 adults, the children add nothing to the accommodation price in this case because it is a unit price, not a per room or per person price.

This is not a holiday the OP is taking 4 people on and only wanting to pay for 2, its a present from 4 adult siblings to their parents which OP expected to pay 25% of and has now been told to pay 40% of the cost of.

I think OP should leave her kids with the other set of grandparents and pay 25%. It is her DB who wants her to bring the DC to entertain the grandparents, not the OP who is trying to have some kind of cut price holiday.

Definitely Mutt. I hope the weekend goes well but I don't see how it can after all this.

MrsHarvey the DB has booked the only house in the area which can sleep 10 adults - it happens to be a "sleeps 12" unit but the OP has repeatedly said there was no option in the area to sleep 10 adults so no cost saving available. There is no sneaking in of extra people and the home owner is utterly unaffected by whether the OP's children are there or not.

Before I had children, I would assume a family of 4 would require more than one room. I wouldn't assume parents would be happy to spend a week bunking up with their children.

It's very condescending to point out people's childless state when attacking them for their decisions. He did what he thought was reasonable.

Also, I'm finding it hard to be on your side OP after reading your thoughts on how your brother spends his money.

Thank you nurnoch that kind of sums it up.

there should be some consideration that you have kids and therefore less money.

Why? The OP made a decision to have children.

There should be consideration that the siblings don't have children so why should they pay more? It works both ways.

So what are you going to do? If you are going to object then you need to do it soon.

Also agree clearly how food will be dealt with.

So it's a Christmas present from all of you.

But also a thank you from you for childcare, although you don't want to actually pay any more for that!

The rooms are irrelevant, as are the DC.

This is a gift from the siblings to the parents. It's split per sibling.

The bedroom / 4 in a bed thing is a total red herring.

The house is the only one that can sleep all the adults.

The same house would have been booked at the same price even if the OP had no DC.

There would have been an empty bedroom and the unit cost for the house would have been split 25% each between the siblings.

Because the OP has children whom the DB has asked the OP to bring, the DB has asked OP to pay 40% of the price of the present from the siblings to their parents.

The only logic behind charging the OP 40% of the price of the present the 4 adult children have decided to give their parents is that the children are increasing the price of the present, but this is not the case.

It may have been a genuine brain fart on the part of the DB, not a sneaky way of paying less than 25% of the price of the present he is giving his parents, but none the less it is incorrect to use the fact the OP has children who could use the extra room to charge her 40% of the total price of this present from 4 adults to their parents while the other 3 present givers only pay 20% each.

The same house would have been booked whether or not the children existed - whether the room is empty or not does not change the price. That and the fact this is a gift from 4 adults equally to their parents and not an extended family holiday is what is significant.

I agree the weekend is going to be rubbish. Not sure that is the OP's fault though. Can't believe people are saying the OP should suck up shelling out an extra 200 pounds she cannot afford and which her brother has decided to charge her without her consent.

If DB's brother has too many beers and snores and his wife (perfectly reasonably) goes and sleeps in the empty room, will the DB shuffle the money around and pay a double share I wonder...