AIBU to not want to split bill evenly six ways

[SaucySpider]

I've just been for a meal with my daughter and son in law together with his parents. My husband and I arrived early so bought some drinks and were seated while we waited for the others. We had a very nice meal and had a good evening. However when the bill came my daughter split the bill evenly six ways but after our first drinks hubby and I only drank tap water (not because we are mean but because we like water with our meal) while the others all had at least two alcoholic drinks then coffees which were added to the bill. Thus we ended up paying for a large portion of their drinks. Don't get me wrong we are always willing to 'get a round in' when we socialise but having already bought our own drinks and not having any more I felt a little bit cheated or am I being a skinflint. Would it have been fairer to just split the food part?

Tight and annoying. Makes the whole thing feel less like “fun spending time together” and more like “I suppose I am prespared to sit with you while I eat”. Of course if you are skint it’s different, but if you can afford it and the difference is fairly minor it’s much nicer just to be generous-minded.

It really baffles people that some folk enjoy tap water doesn't it

Myimaginarycathasfleas not exasperated about paying for what I eat and drink at all. Saying ‘we’ll each get our own shall we?’ and telling the waiter as you order that you want separate bills seems far less awkward to me than trying to nitpick at the end over an itemized bill re who had an extra glass of wine or slice of garlic bread or having people agreeing to split the bill while inwardly seething about it like the OP.

If you’re on a low budget, say at the outset, “we’re a bit short this month so we’ll just get ours - separate bill please waiter.” People have tongues in their mouths, they should speak up or suck it up when it doesn’t pan out how they want it to.

YANBU

A couple of drinks each from everyone else can almost double the bill

I don't understand why you got to the restaurant early enough to buy and drink alcoholic drinks and then drank tap water with your meal. Were you hoping to save money by only having to buy two drinks? Wouldn't it have been more pleasurable to have had a glass or two of wine with your meal?

I don't understand why some people can't/won't understand that some people don't enjoy drinking alcohol with a meal. I quite like a glass of wine before a meal but not with. For me the alcohol takes away from the flavour of the food and vice versa. That may seem weird to you but it's the way it is for me,so why should I and others like me be made to feel bad for that?

I think YABU

I can understand why you think this is not fair, BUT in group situations - family or friends, as the bill is for the group/table this can cause resentment typically between drinkers and non-drinkers.

The easiest approach is to agree how/if the bill will be split BEFORE the meal - or if this is not possible as soon as the bill arrives. I'm afraid if you don't say anything at the time or beforehand, you can't really complain. If this really bothers you, in the future, politely decline.

I find when going out for group meals, I will ask everyone around whether we should split the bill equally or whether the preference would be to do separate. Another option is to split the food bill equally and then order drinks separately at the bar.

Well I don't understand how anyone can enjoy soft drinks like Coke, but that's because everyone is different.

If I'm driving, I'll have one small beer (so shoot me) and tap water, because I don't like sweet soft drinks, especially with food.

So a very mixed reaction here. Just to clarify a few points. We do normally just split evenly and I don't generally have a problem with any variances between who has what - it normally balances out. However on this occasion by foolishly paying for our first drinks and not having any more paid drinks (and no, we certainly weren't trying to get out of paying for a round) the balance was quite skewed. Our meal cost was only about £12 each and we ended up paying £21 each plus our initial cost of drinks at nearly £6 so a total of £24 each for one course. Incidently I only drink water for medical reasons and DH was driving. Obviously we didn't want to make a fuss with ILs and I've 'sucked it up' but I was interested to hear other opinions and I'll chalk this one up to experience.

Like I said before OP, would have been better to add to the tab. I’m a waitress and I see this all the time.

I also think the in laws were rude if they knew you had already paid for your drinks. We went for brunch with my Dsis and her DH last week. We all had coffees but me and DH had cocktails as well so when the bill came I told them to only put £25 on their card and we paid the rest. It’s just good manners really.

Add the pre dinner drinks to the tab I mean

Would you have given them a few drinks if they had visited you in your house? Just look at it as being generous and friendly and suck it up

It was the DD who decided to split, the in laws probably did not want to make a fuss. I do not see how they can be blamed at all.

If I knowingly had more than others at a meal, I would never suggest splitting. If someone else suggested it I would've said that I had more and I'll happily pay for what I had. I hate this situation, sometimes it's easier to try and mention at the beginning of the meal to pay for yourselves

Yanbu . I don’t think it’s fair re drinkers / non drinks regarding cost ..

Would you have given them a few drinks if they had visited you in your house

But that's not a fair comparison given that a bottle of wine at home costs about the same as a single glass in a restaurant.

It was the DD who decided to split, the in laws probably did not want to make a fuss. I do not see how they can be blamed at all.

Yeah the op isn't to blame but it's obviously pissed her off enough to post on MN. Seems odd to me seeing as her daughter and son in law were in the group🤷🏻‍♀️

When out woh the girls half are muslim so we split the food and pay our drinks separately. Works well for me too as I often drive and drink tap water!

I'm laughing at all the posters who "... can't BEAR these discussions" yet here they are, racing to the thread to impart their nonsense.

Far from OP being a skinflint, the other diners are greedily accepting hospitality that wasn't offered. Every person/couple who knows that they've ordered more than they've paid for are greedy and entitled. It's not the OP who should be feeling ashamed.

As for the paying £100 for two bowls of rice; I'd rather have given that to charity or left it in the bank. Your fellow diners are not nice people. Decent people don't do that, stiff you with a ridiculous bill whilst you subsidise what they consume.

@Lying It reminds of the thread about how exorbitant it is for the school to offer a trip to a West End theatre to see a show at the cost of £50. Now, I agree, potentially that's a fair sum of money, but one of the people complaining said it was a lot of money when they had happily spent £600 on two birthday parties for their primary age kids. The way people see money differently never ceases to amaze me.

I'd generally strongly in favour of bills bearing some approximate relatoin to costs but in this instance I'd have let it go, reasons being:

(1) of the six diners, four were part of your direct family, the other two part of your extended family;
(2) the differences you're talking about [12 'extra' drinks ordered, you paying for one third of the extra spend, i.e. in effect for 4 drinks that were nothing to do with you] aren't huge.

don't get me wrong, if, especially for maybe younger people who often dine in big groups, often with people they barely know, a vegetarian, teetotal, dieter, or whatever, should in no way be expected to subsidise other people's heavier consumption, no way, over their lifetimes this could quite easily add up to thousands of pounds' worth of pointless, undeserved, gifting. but in the circumstances you've described, yeah, best just to suck it up.

I don't mind that, Shatners, we all spend money on what we like and enjoy and that's fine. Even if I'd never spend masses on some things, perhaps other people would say the same about what I buy without turning a hair; we're all different.

What I do have a problem with is these low-class people who dictate how other people will spend their money and use coercion, discomfiture and people's general dislike for confrontation, to inveigle money from other people. It is extortion and it's disgusting. I won't think of it kindly or with any kind of acceptance. It's not acceptable at all.

Only greedy and classless people expect others to pick up the bill for what they themselves have consumed. If it feels unfair then it probably was an the shame is on the others who colluded in it.

There are lots of posters on MN who shrug off bill-splitting and that must be down to two main factors a) they're not working to a budget and/or b) they expect others to ante up. I don't care what they personally do but, when they involve others it's not on. Not with express and explicit agreement.

The problem is it’s never easy to only pay for what you had if you are in a large group.

I’ve done that before where people say they didn’t drink but forget they had a coffee, some had a dessert, others had a starter....Even when everyone is adamant they know exactly what they spent and put in the exact money, the total is never right and the quibbling starts and it’s embarrassing especially if you are the one trying to work it out.

I went out with friends on Saturday and we all drank white wine and probably the same amount and we all had two courses, easy, split the bill.

However I usually drive so don’t drink and some people do drink a lot and it’s not fair. I went to a recent meal with about 20 colleagues where everyone had different amounts of food and some drank, some didnt. One retired colleague in his 70s ended up paying about £35 for just a pizza and others had their alcohol subsidised. I felt bad for him but the drinkers split the bill and there were so many people it would have been awkward to have challenged it. I paid the same amount for nowhere near that amount of food and drink (tap water only) and to top it off had three people ask me for a lift home .

The problem is it’s never easy to only pay for what you had if you are in a large group.

This. If you go out with another couple and have a bottle of wine but they don’t drink? It’s obvious you’ve spent more and easy to say you’ll put in more when the bill comes. In a group of 10, with shared bottles of wine and mineral water, it’s a heck of a lot harder and, while you may be acutely aware that you’ve had the cheapest main and one glass of water, the person at the other end of the table probably isn’t. So it’s not necessarily due to people cynically trying to gain a subsidy from others.

It's my money and I would strongly object to be paying for other people to be drinking when I wasn't.

The easy thing to do is ask that drinks are paid for separately in future so people can buy their own booze.