Man asks his tinder date for a refund on what he spent, when she rejected him after the third date. Was he right or wrong?

[littlepattilou]

As in the title really... A man dated a woman he met on Tinder, and paid for the 'refreshments' on all 3 dates. When she dumped him after the third date, he messaged her and told her she owed him for what he spent on her!

So.... Was he right to do this?

YANBU for yes he had the right to ask.

YABU for no, he should not be asking.

www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/sex-relationships/relationships/man-asks-woman-25-refund-23584365

I haven't read the article, but unless he suggested they go halves and she completely refused or something like that, he's being completely unreasonable. He shouldn't offer to pay if he's expecting something in return.

Of course he shouldn’t, incredibly rude of him

Haven't read the article, but assume he didn't get sex. Would he have asked for it back if he had got sex? My thoughts are he is paying for the expectation of sex. If he has an issue with the fact he might not get it, then he should not offer to pay for 3 dates in a row.

Decided to read the article before posting and see that I was correct, She offered to pay, and he said no. He was hoping to essentially make her feel she owed him sex.

So, a date is a financial exchange, he pays out he wants something in return. If he doesn't get he wants his deposit back?

@PaleFox she says she offered to go halves. At $35 for half of 3 dates I don't think he was pushing the boat out much! It does sound as though he expected to get his money's worth!

He sounds like a prince and this thread sounds like it's been started in really good faith.

But I'll bite. No, of course she doesn't owe him money. He want obliged to pay, he did, it's a date, that makes it a gift. Not payment or a bribe. He wants to make payments and bribes, he can make an arrangement for whatever he intended to get and didn't receive.

This is why all dates should start with a legally binding contract.

He was very rude. I dont think I'd have let someone pay for 3 dates in a row but certainly sounded like he expected sex

I was listening to a politics podcast the other day which said in some areas of china if a couple breaks up the man is expected to pay money to the woman for wasted time invested. Blew my mind, really hadnt expected that of China

The article says she offered to pay but he insisted on paying on all three dates.

Three dates? And she didn't have sex with him?

Definite refund/reimbursement time.

She offered to pay, and he said no. He was hoping to essentially make her feel she owed him sex.

^^This

So he thought he was buying a relationship? He was wrong. Tough shit. He should have stated his terms prior to the first date so she could run a mile.

Not unless they discussed before hand and had a verbal contract.

@bungaloid

This is why all dates should start with a legally binding contract.

Cross-post :D

Haven't read the article as can't bear the paper but what the hell????
She owes him NOTHING.

No he isnt owed any money. The assumption being that anything he spent wad a gift.

What he should have done, is requested the bill/s to be split in the 1st place, if he wanted to.

She offered to pay and he refused at the time. It's creepy to pay in expectation of recompense for that payment and outrageously rude to then demand a refund when that doesn't happen.

If he wants to pay for sex, he care hire a prostitute.

On a side note, where was he taking her that her share only added up to $35 after three dates?!

Of course he’s wrong. What was he trying to do, buy her?

@StillCoughingandLaughing

If he wants to pay for sex, he care hire a prostitute.

On a side note, where was he taking her that her share only added up to $35 after three dates?!

I wondered that too. McDonalds maybe!

I agree with the majority that he is being unreasonable to ask!

As many have said, he just wanted a shag, and she didn't give it. Cheeky git.

He wanted her to feel obligated. Good for her that she didn’t. Creepy man should learn his lesson, the revolting entitled git.

Well, it’s not hard to see why she binned him off after 3 dates.

Of course he’s in the wrong

He’s put on the “nice guy” acting hoping it will get him laid.

When she wouldn’t, he wants money.

He’s revolting

Buying a couple of drinks does not tie anybody in to a contract for providing sexual services.

He needs to fuck off.

What a prince among men he is!

of course he isn't being unreasonable.

three dates where he spent money on her should at least equate to a hand job even if she didn't want a 4th date. Don't let a man pay for anything unless you're prepared to put out or at least go down on him before dumping him.

conversely if he'd dumped her after he'd paid, she still should have offered him a hand job as a good will gesture.

obviously.

[hmmm]