A splitting the bill AIBU

[JamHolyMoly]

We recently went out for dinner to celebrate my step-father's retirement. There were 11 adults and 4 children. The adults, bar one, had 3 courses. Most had at least one alcoholic drink, some only had soft drinks. Money wise, most people consumed roughly the same amount of food and drink except for one person who had the most expensive dish on the menu (double the cost of everyone else's). This person also had a number of very expensive drinks as well as a couple of extra side dishes. The children all had the kids menu food which was £8 for 3 courses. They all drank water.

At the end of the meal, the guest who had the most expensive meal got the bill and told everyone that it would be £40 a head, and included the children in this. We have 3 children so by his working out of the bill we owed £200 for me, dh and our 3 children.

FYI I am not someone who ever argues about the bill and I'm always happy to split the bill evenly amongst all adults present. I don't think I have ever refused to pay an evenly split bill so I don't have form for this.

Anyway, I immediately said that DH and I weren't going to be paying £120 for our three children's meals seeing as their 3 courses totalled £24. It then became really awkward as the person who had split the bill up started getting arsey with me and made a number of rude comments implying I was being tight and basically tried to embarrass me in front of the group. I kept my cool and didn't bite back. Everyone else went very quiet and refused to be drawn into it. My dh was chatting to an acquaintance at another table at the time so he didn't even know what was going on and wasn't there to back me up. It put a dampener on the entire occasion and it's left me feeling very upset that no one spoke up to say "hey that's not fair to expect Jam and dh to pay £120 for £24 food".

In the past I have always stood up for people when they've had one course and a soft drink but been asked to pay an evenly split bill which covered alcohol and numerous course, and would never expect someone to pay for my meal if I had had considerably more than them. I told the person to remove the £24 we owed for the kids from the total bill and then we were happy to split the remaining amount amongst all adults and add the £24 onto the amount we personally owed. I didn't expect anyone to pay for our children's meals but likewise I didn't expect for us to be covering everyone else's expensive food options and alcohol consumption through our children.

Anyway, a couple of family members have since contacted me to say that I ruined the occasion and have upset SF and his (adult) children.

I honestly don't believe I was unfair to refuse to pay £120 for my children's meals but at the same time a number of people in the family disagree and think I was being very unfair. I don't understand their mindset or how they can justify this so maybe I ABU? What do you all think? Should I just have sucked it up and paid the entire £200?

I thought for a second you might be my friend but I only drink £10 wine on half price offer with my fajitas!

Both classy AND money-savvy. I like it

Possibly subsidising other's meals is an expected part of the expense of enjoying a meal out with a large group.

Sometimes you will be doing the subsidising by £10 or £20, sometimes somebody will be subsidising you.

It is incredibly naive to assume that you will only be paying for what you eat down to the penny. It really misses the point of communal dining like this.

If you don't have sufficient funds to potentially have to do this, then better not to come and be put in an awkward position.

I don't mean to sound patronising, I meant to say that if I couldn't afford a friends birthday meal out, then I would decline the meal and suggest a walk another time.

FWIW, your friend sounds awful - even when you said you were short, she still insisted on the full £25 from you? Now that is brass necked!

Having supper at someone's house is very different to a formal dinner party though. To the former I would take something that can be had,or not...to the latter (they're going out of fashion now anyway) I would take something extra instead...dessert wine, champagne, port, chocolates, flowers or whatever.

If its a formal dinner party though and someone I don't know well brings a bottle of wine, I'm still pleased, but it does tell me immediately that this person has a poor grasp of etiquette.

This is absolute nonsense and so is your assumption that the guest would be offended by you not drinking their wine immediately.

Being pissed off that your gift isn't immediately consumed would constitute a poor grasp of etiquette. Bringing a bottle of wine to a dinner party, however well you know the hosts, definitely does not.

I passed over this thread a few times - then finally clicked on it to see why 'just another' splitting-the-bill thread has generated 400 replies...
HolyMoG! What a cheeky pig fucker SF's son is!
You definitely did the right thing, OP.
Your family, and everyone else at the table all suck, too, for not backing you up.

If you don't have sufficient funds to potentially have to do this, then better not to come and be put in an awkward position.

Or better still, don't put people in awkward positions like this in the first place.

*Sometimes you will be doing the subsidising by £10 or £20, sometimes somebody will be subsidising you.
It is incredibly naive to assume that you will only be paying for what you eat down to the penny. It really misses the point of communal dining like this. If you don't have sufficient funds to potentially have to do this, then better not to come and be put in an awkward position. *

What a horrible attitude. I personally do have the funds and if anything always chuck in a bit extra but I would hate that people with less money than me feel they can't come out. If someone said "I'm a bit low on funds so won't be drinking and cannily afford what I have" and your response was that they shouldn't have come you're quite frankly nasty!

It would be petty to quibble over £5 which you can easily afford but I would have zero problem with someone who wanted to order within their means and pay for what they had.

To be fair I don’t think I’ve been to a ‘formal dinner party’ since my mum let me come downstairs and say hi to her dinner guests in my pyjamas, in about 1992.

Sorry for continuing to derail the thread OP! But it is rather unanimous that YANBU after all!

I find these threads so weird. I don't drink - haven't done for a while now. When I am out with friends they always pay more than me to account for that. I never ask - they always just do it. I always offer an equal split and I am always grateful. I cannot fathom why anyone would suggest children pay the same as adults though (unless at MacD's). Bonkers.

you're quite frankly nasty

Play the ball, not the man, eh?

No problem at all with you disagreeing with my point of view, but personal insults aren't in the spirit

Yes, apologies for the derail OP, but its been quite illuminating!

@GreenHouseKeeping yes, and on a £12.95 meal I’d be happy to maybe subsidise someone upto about £5, but not double the cost of my meal!

FWIW your attitude stinks, I’d rather see my friends together and have everyone pay for their own than single some people out because they’re worried they can’t afford to subsidise other people’s meals.

It really misses the point of communal dining like this. If you don't have sufficient funds to potentially have to do this, then better not to come and be put in an awkward position.

So unless you can budget in for one person in a party of 25 to massively take the piss and order hundreds of quids worth of stuff while everyone else sticks around, say 50..then you should not go out at all? OR, we shame these cheeky fuckers for being cheeky fuckers. And watch them squirm when they realise they have to pay the full 200 quid cost of their food (or drinks..it always seems to be drinks where people really take the piss) themselves. Its odd how it always seems to be the one (or two) who have consumed more than the rest of the table put together who come up with 'lets split equally'. And tend to get really pissed off and call others tight hen they want to be a bit more fair about it.

I can't believe this, how can kids be expected to be included when splitting the cost? This has made me so so angry.

Your step fathers son just wanted to be subsidised but your sister I can't understand, maybe it's the fact that she ended up paying more when your kids were taken out of the equation, I can't think of any other explanation and even if that is her reason then she is still wrong.

U did the right thing but who ever is contacting u after is unreasonable.

Definitely see what your mum has to say about it all, I would be more annoyed at your sister right now than step fathers son.

I think you're conflating several issues there Vixxy

My point is that, in an attempt to be inclusive, we have done away with social norms and traditional etiquette. This has the advantage of including people who otherwise would have been also to attend as they would have been unable to afford it.

Unfortunately, the flip side of it is the rise of CFery of the kind you describe.

I'm not sure what the answer is tbh - I think in an attempt to do the right thing, we have muddied the waters and created a situation in which some people take advantage.

I sort of get what you’re saying about ‘communal dining’ GreenHouseKeeping but that also comes with an expectation that you don’t then order a main that costs twice the price of everyone else’s, or drink champagne while everyone else is on house white. If you want to have those things, either save it for another time when it’s just you paying and you can have whatever you want, or do the right thing and insist (without being asked) that you’ll be putting in more to cover the extra cost. Knowingly choosing expensive items knowing that others will be subsidising the cost is despicable behaviour.

And if anyone expresses discomfort with splitting the bill, then the only decent thing is to say ‘of course’ and let them work out what they owe, whether or not you think they’re being a tightarse. Arguing with someone over the table because you want them to pay more than their share is far worse etiquette than them asking not to split in the first place!

The problem with bill spliting is that you can't really tell if you could afford it until afterwards! Even if I only spend 10 I have no way of knowing what others are going to splurge on. Are the proponents of bill splitting suggesting that I take up to £100 extra with me, just in case?!

As an aside, my friends are very much not CFs about this sort of thing and always make sure the non-drinkers/those who had a starter are protected. In fact sub-groups who split their section of the bill between themselves generally emerge. I love my friends

@GreenHouseKeeping I understand what you mean about the wine. OH and I give wine depending on the host and the meal. If the host is known choosing excellent wines, we contribute something else.

BTW, if you want to stop derailing the thread, stop replying to the people who are goading you. Not everybody needs to be answered. :)

The tight wads are the ones trying to get you to pay for their meals. And they're pissed off because you highlighted their grabbiness and no other reason. I'm embarrassed for them.

I’d rather see my friends together and have everyone pay for their own than single some people out because they’re worried they can’t afford to subsidise other people’s meals

I do see your point, but this creates a group dynamic where it is every man for himself.

Sharing (costs and benefits) aims to create a dynamic where there is kindness and goodwill which can be drawn upon and restocked as fortunes (literal and metaphorical) ebb and flow over time.

I think your approach is practical and logical, but just a bit, I dunno, cold? Transactional? selfish?

TBH its just a shame that the few spoil it for the many. Tragedy of the commons writ large...

@JingsMahBucket Its called a discussion - different points of view y'know

I always agree to split equally because I can't stand it when people insist upon totting up what they've had to the nearest 10p. I have sat at a table where people who we didn't know well discussed for 15 minutes who should pay what. We just divided it by 15 then when they argued chucked another 20 quid in and left. We dumped them. I often drink tap water but that's my choice and i don't care what other people have had either, it's part of being sociable that you just split. I usually say shall we go dutch and then it's clear.

I'm usually quite happy to split the bill. However, I know a few people who try to take advantage like this. They try to sneer when we say that we'll have individual bills, but we don't let it worry us.

Next time, make sure that you are paying individually if this person is there. And children's meals should automatically be deducted before splitting the bill unless they eat an adult meal.

It's unpleasant having nobody supporting you. Are they usually so selfish? But at least you have set a precedent so that they all know not to try it on again.

Sharing (costs and benefits) aims to create a dynamic where there is kindness and goodwill which can be drawn upon and restocked as fortunes (literal and metaphorical) ebb and flow over time.

I think you’re overthinking this - where everyone is having roughly the same that’s fine, I think most people would agree they’d be happy to pay a couple of quid extra when dining with a large group.

YADNBFU! I have vowed not to go for group meals because of this. The moment someone has starter, and another diner does not, you can't split the bill. In October we joined in for a big birthday meal, started at the bar, then the table was ready, we took our drinks to the table. My drink lasted meekest the whole meal. We didn't have starters, so waited patiently for the main course while some others had their starters. Then I noticed some of the 'starter crew' had bottles of wine turn up, and at end of meal, the Starter Crew said £40 each please. So I paid £40 for my £13 meal! Actually, I paid £80 for me and DP's £25 meals. To cap it all, the Starter Crew collected money from everyone, then announced it was £60 light...SIGH...
We were invited out with a different group for New Years Day meal, and I decided to decline, after my BIL mentioned he wouldn't be having starters - alarm bells started in my head.
I'm not tight, but I'm not stupid. If everyones tucking into slices of pizza and carafes of wine, split away, or if everyone has a couple of drinks (I'm really not counting) and a curry, split away!