Splitting restaurant bill

[idontwanttodothisanymore]

I’m one of those people who like to pay for just my meal. I hate splitting the bill by how many people there are.

Me and DH went out with his friend and his OH the other day.

Mine and DH meal came to: £31.57
I had pizza and water, he had chicken and one coke.
DH friend and OH meal came to: £49.78
They had ribs, lasagne, chips and 3 drinks.

Final bill was £81.75
DH friend had two vouchers for £20 off, so they both used that.

Then the OH said we could pay the rest. So we ended up paying £41.75 - £10 more than our meal!!!

I had never met her before and was completely shocked that she wanted us to split by 4 when our meal was cheaper.
She was very intimidating anyway so I didn’t want to say anything.

We were going to do 2 bills but the waiter was all flustered so we said don’t bother. Regretting it now!

I know it’s only £10 but our circumstances are so different. They both work and she has one child - he works full time and she works part time. Whereas DH works part time (and overtime if there is any) but I don’t (I had to leave my job due to medically issues), and we have 2 children.

DH doesn’t think I should be annoyed but I really am!
AIBU to be annoyed?

I don’t think I’ll ever see her again anyway, I didn’t get a good vibe from her and she’s just not my kind of person at all.

It's really odd that the tight posters think anyone who splits is a freeloader. It is incredibly rare that someone sits there ordering the lobsters and steak whilst everyone else has pasta. Most restaurants are designed to cater to a certain market and it's not often that you have extreme variations in price across the menu. People who split are happy to lose by a bit- that's the whole point. They don't notice, don't calculate, don't care.

It's not meant to be "funny" in the least. It's meant to illustrate to you the concept of sharing and friends not penny pinching from one another

Paying or wanting to pay for your own food in a restaurant is not penny pinching though, its about paying for food you can afford. When you host a meal you cook what you can afford. If someone can afford to serve up a a big lavish spread - fine. If someone wants to serve up Farmfoods pizza - also fine. Its not a competition.

But don't you feel bad about subsidising the friends who cook cheaper food?

Its not subsidising if there is no money changing hands though is it?

Be honest Laguna, when you host do you tell people to bring whatever they want to drink themselves?

Ive always got drinks in and if it was a family or say a few friends for dinner meal there would always be wine, fizzy juice and fresh fruit juices. The Come Dine thing we do with friends is different though as people do generally bring their own alcohol, and I take my own to their houses etc.

And do you take things with you? (I can't go anywhere empty handed; I always feel the need to take a bottle or flowers or crisps and houmous or something

If I was going for dinner with friends at their house yes I usually do. If it was my best friend - no, we usually just get a take away and have a good old drink. If its a Come Dine night with the group of friends - no, apart from our own alcohol!

People who split are happy to lose by a bit- that's the whole point. They don't notice, don't calculate, don't care

I've never called anyone a freeloader but there are people that do care clearly because they can only pay for their own. That's not being "tight", that's sensible as far as I'm concerned.

I would have thought the difference with hosting was obvious. If the host(s) decide to prepare a particularly fancy meal or serve expensive wine, that is their choice. If they order the most expensive items on the menu and several cocktails, but expect to split the bill equally with someone on water, they are making that person pay for their choice. The hosting equivalent would be buying expensive ingredients and then asking for a contribution at the end of the night. It’s completely different.

But it isn't different. It's all the same concept. Either you resent sharing things with your friends or you don't.

If it's a cash issue, as others have said, you can do something different - don't spoil other people's evenings by scowling over the menu for the cheap stuff and then scowling over the bill. Not one of my friends would object if I asked to go somewhere cheaper or just to meet for drinks before or afterwards!

If someone takes the piss by ordering cocktails when you've been on water, THAT is different and it's been said numerous times upthread. But generally speaking it's a couple of quid difference and if you dine out regularly together, it all evens out.

Of course it’s different.

I couldn’t be arsed going out for a meal with someone who nit picked over the bill. It’s tedious and irritating. Obviously if someone has only had a salad and a bottle of water then that’s different and I wouldn’t expect them to split the bill but if everyone has had similar then in my book they should.

Well, ho, its exactly the same for me. When I share a meal with friends and loved ones, I want them to eat and drink what they want. When its my turn to pay, Im happy to pay. I have having to work out who owes what. Especially as the differences in sums involved are small in the scheme of things and will tend to work out over time. If they don't, then we find another way to work that out...that doesn't involve cheese paring

What kind of logic are people working off if they believe that someone who doesn’t pay the minimum for what they are and drank is more generous than someone who did

6 people pay a third each? Are you sure.....

If six people shared 3 starters, then they each pay one third of the cost of all the** starters. Yes I’m sure.

But why wouldn't they have "paid the minimum" ? If we go out for lunch (ok THAT would never happen, but bear with me) and you have a piece of cake, then the next time I have an extra coffee, do you see how it works out over time?? If we go out somewhere fancy and I have 3 courses and you don't, of course I am going to insist on paying more, most likely for the whole thing if there's a really big discrepancy.

(Unless people only eat out with you once, of course. Which I could certainly understand of some of the posters on this thread!)

But cherry - for the umpteenth time why do you think people can't add up? It's that we don't think it's friendly or appropriate.

Again, I find your use of the word "subsidising" fascinating in this context. You sound utterly resentful of your so-called friends.

Not sure if you’re being obtuse. People have said it is distressing or embarrassing to calculate bills. Which makes me assume they can’t add up.

What word would you use for contributing to other people’s food so it’s cheaper for them but not for you? And I love my friends, there is zero angst when we eat out together and more often than not we pay for our own. It sure how you could take what I’ve said to twist it into saying I resent them?

You must be a right laugh at Christmas or birthdays. Does it keep you awake if you spent £10 on a friend's child and they only spent £7.99 on yours because you checked the Argos website?! How can you recoup that money? Why should you "subsidise" someone else's Christmas?

WTAF are you going on about?!

It’s boring when people make things up, please stop.

Do you know what ‘subsidise’ actually means?

"Which makes me assume they can't add up"

You've made a stupid assumption.

Also, I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you’re being obtuse Rebecca rather than just plain stupid, but gift giving is different to eating out together. You buy what you can afford for other people, and they buy what they can afford for you. HTH.

Well bubble adding up seems to blow people’s minds so I disagree

The meals I’ve been to where this has been a problem have been in big groups of acquaintances - school parents’ socials, work meals out - where some people drank loads and loads of booze and didn’t cover it, probably underestimating the cost.

If six people shared 3 starters, then they each pay one third of the cost of all the starters. Yes I’m sure.

Six people each pay one third of the cost of all the starters? Would that not result in the starters being paid for twice? That is to say, six thirds?

It comes down to whether you see yourself as purely an individual or as part of a community. The community spirit shares and trusts in the community to share honestly. The pure individual gets the calculator out.

Can you imagine Jesus getting a calculator out at the last supper? Judas the bastard ordered the good wine and the artisan bread.

But many people don't have an extra coffee some of the time, if they are a light eater or on a small budget they never have an extra coffee because they either don't want it or can't afford it so they never have it. The time when they have more than someone else is unlikely to ever happen, so when is it 'going to even out over time'?

If it's acceptable to choose to not go, or have people round at home, or go somewhere cheaper, why is it not acceptable to choose to go to the more expensive place suggested but only have one course with no alcohol?

There's nothing wrong with doing that either. A pizza from most places is more than enough food for most people, so it's not like their sitting there hungry because they didn't have a starter or dessert.

It's all well and good people saying 'If I have three courses and wine and there's someone who only had a pizza and water of course I'll put in extra' but the tales of £30 shares of bills for £10 worth of food and drink prove that plenty of people don't put in extra.

Oh, and if 6 people have 3 starters between them, they all need to pay for half a starter.

Wow cherry you really are an unpleasant and patronising piece of work, aren't you?! You "assume" people can't add up? Clue - basic maths is not why they are looking pained. More likely you are embarrassing them with your scraping to save a few quid.

Sharing. That's the word. I don't give a flying fuck if I've ended up paying a fiver towards my friend's dinner. I care that he/she has had a great night and that we've enjoyed ourselves. That's my priority. If your priority is making sure that you haven't contributed anything to anyone else's evening then hey, it's your social life!

I'm not "making stuff up". It's an illustrative example to show you what you sound like when you bang on about people being subsidised.

Sssssh, don't question cherry's maths. She's the expert!

If someone takes the piss by ordering cocktails when you've been on water, THAT is different and it's been said numerous times upthread. But generally speaking it's a couple of quid difference and if you dine out regularly together, it all evens out.

You keep insulting people but no one is actually moaning about paying £2 more. They are moaning about paying £10, £20, £30 more. Which you don’t agree they should, apparently, so who exactly are you arguing with?

Wot Pandora said, ^