To hate splitting bills at restaurants?

[AtticusFrost]

We socialise a fair bit but do not have a high income. We do this by being careful about how we spend our money. So I absolutely hate it if in a restaurant at the end of the night someone says forcefully we should just split the bill.
No! I know it is easier. But myself and DH have chosen cheaper options so we can afford this. And it always people who have spent loads who say this.

Many people do not want to be subbed, like some Victorian street urchin,They are quite happy to go out and spend time with their friends and enjoy a pasta main with a glass of water.

The only thing they ask is that they don't sub you with your fillet steak and carafe of red. Seems simple enough to me.

Don’t people entertain at home any more? We used to do that and just take it in turns. Couldn’t afford to ‘eat out’ back in the day.

There really are some deluded and pretty horrible people on here.

Poor people shouldn't socialise outside unless they can spend with abandon and not care how much other people eat and drink, they need to pay a share!

Or asking if people don't entertain at home? Of course people do, but actually entertaining at home can get expensive, possibly more expensive as then you are hosting and paying for everyone!

I am firmly in the 'pay your own bill' camp and for two reasons.

I have been in a low wage or had young children and high out goings. Money was tight and often when we went out I would choose the cheaper things on the menu (in fact I often still do!) I will order house wine or even drive so I save on alcohol.

The other reason I like to pay my own way is, I like a drink and will often drink more than my friends. In fact I have a few friends who don't drink. I would hate to be out and having to watch how much I drink or not ordering alcohol as I wouldn't want to inflate a friends bill. It's so much easier and fairer to pay for what you eat and drink.

Thankfully most of my family and friends feel the same way so it is never an issue.

I just do not see the point in spending what is supposed to be an enjoyable evening- a treat if you will- having a single grain of rice and tap water, fretting over every penny and worrying that your friends are out to fleece you, so much so that you have to make a point to the waiter that you must have separate bills before the meal even commences. In that case you are either stingy, short on cash (fair enough but if I was skint my priority probably wouldn't be dining out) or you just have crap friends.

Nice dramatisation there. Ever consider that some just want to take care of the bill without having to do the discussion in the first place. If I paid for my bill than I have nothing further to do on my end, it’s taken care of, don’t have to seek out the server or wait for others to decide what they want to do concerning the bill and trying to calculate what they had and who had what at the end of the meal. I don’t drive and take public transport so waiting around for people to sort themselves is not always an option. I see little reason not to go ahead and pay when I know my own drink and eating habits and not going to want more than I’ve already ordered.

I can afford to go out but just because I can doesn’t mean I want to spend more than warranted and why should I? Because I have the money to do so? Why should I pay for food and alcohol that I’m not having and don’t want?

Me politely saying, “I’ll just pay now if that’s all right” after I’ve given my order to the server is barely a minute exchange. It’s simply knowing I’ve sorted everything and can leave when I choose. It also helpful if their card machine goes down unexpectedly and cash is needed. I can run out quickly to an atm vs doing so after I’ve consumed the meal.

Different attitudes I guess. At no point am
I watching what people are ordering and drinking and totting that up in my head! Then working out that I’m down by a fiver. Just doesn’t sound much fun that’s all. I’m not suggesting people on a tight budget don’t eat out at all.

It doesn’t register with me who has had starter and who hasn’t - sometimes I do sometimes I don’t. I wouldn’t be thinking ‘oh for goodness sake Bob has ordered scallops for starters ‘for the table’ and he knows nobody likes them - he’s really trying to screw us all over again.

There have been times where friends haven’t been drinking and we’ll adjust it down. But over time, if you eat out with the same friends it all tends to work out.

Surely the whole idea of bill-splitting in the first place is when you all realise, after the meal and when the bill comes, that you've all had pretty much the same (cost-wise) and it's less faff than working out who spent exactly what, just to end up with one person paying an extra £1 and another paying 75p less, when nobody is really that bothered - as the difference will probably be rounded up and paid towards a tip anyway.

When it's patently obvious that some people have spent significantly more or less than others, that should instantly render the concept of bill-splitting completely inappropriate on that occasion. In such a scenario, anybody suggesting/assuming/demanding bill-splitting regardless is clearly seeking to take advantage of others or, at the very least, socially and/or mathematically challenged. Going on the shaming and anger that many such people will resort to when others disagree with their cash-in opportunity, I highly doubt that there are many in the latter category, though.

Except, maybe, if it's the lower spender deliberately suggesting it as a subtle kindness to their dining companions - maybe grandparents with small appetites wanting to treat/help their adult children and grandchildren.

If someone suggests splitting the bill when it's grossly unfair, then you can guarantee that I will not be going out for a meal with them again unless it's somewhere that I can order my own at the bar, on an app, or have an individual bill. It's nothing to do with our financial situations (although I am financially comfortable, not all of us are), it's more of a basic respect that we don't put anybody in the situation that they cannot afford something later on in the month because someone else in the group feels entitled to have other people pay for them. I will treat my friends often and without strings, but they would never expect it, and we always chose a location according to everyone's preference which can be based on their finances, or just what they want to eat!

Thankfully, of the main groups I go out with, we all agree on how bills should be paid. I am the official bill calculator, tend to pay on my credit card and they send me their share so that we're not inconveniencing our server. Best friend and I have a shared Revolut pot that we use when we go abroad together so we've always got access to cash if one persons card is stolen or phone dies etc, and we sometimes use this in the UK for ease.

Exactly @WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll .

I don't quibble over small amounts.

@WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll completely agree on this; if it's a pennies difference then we just split and add a tip, no quibbling needed for that.

With friends we'll split it equally and then adjust it a bit if someone has gone OTT (who'd always offer - sometimes a gentle nudge if they are a bit pissed) or someone will offer to pay the tip if they've had a wee bit more - like an a liqueur coffee. Also if someone wanted a complete blow out they'd say - look I'm having 3 courses - I'll pay more ... or whatever.

And if your friendship group is that everyone pays what they had, then that's great too.

But with work colleagues, people you don't know very well, hobby groups, friends you don't see that often - it can be awkward. And no, you shouldn't not go out if you know you can only afford a main and a glass of wine and everyone else will be chugging it back. Obviously you aren't going to say yes to the Ritz if you can only afford Pizza Express. But people, especially when pissed, do lose their antennae a bit.

I think, when confronted by deliberately high-spending angry insistent bill-splitters, who will shame you for coming to the meal when you 'can't afford it', it's better to respond in kind and subtly turn the shame right back on to them, where it belongs.

Instead of saying "I can't afford to split it" - which then leaves you open to being manipulated and gaslighted and painted as the bad guy - if you say "I'm sorry, John, but I can't afford to treat you this time" and leave it there, you could leave them speechless and feeling (and looking) very very small indeed.

We’re adding manipulation and gaslighting to these nights out! Who the hell are you all going out with? Why would you go out with people who behave like this? Can be much fun.

Can’t be much fun.

“This time”?

even with more obligation-driven meals you would surely not want to spend your time and meal out with such a horrible individual again, and there are ways to ensure that. It’s not about people with less money not being allowed meals out, but just self-preservation against people you know (apparently for certain) to be deliberately trying to “shame” you into paying for their “steak and wine guzzling”, and have picked you specially as a target. Why would you spend another meal with such a person, when many of us have been fortunate enough not to have had this experience, so it is clearly not just a standard thing that everyone has to deal with.

All this back and forth public shaming and calling-out, it’s not normal, and you shouldn’t just accept it as a normal part of meals out that these people exist and you have to share a meal with them

It's amazing the twists and turns people will pull rather than just not be dicks by creating an issue out of someone simply wanting to pay for their own.

It's absolutely staggering that people would rather their friends didn't go out than opted not to split a bill.

Bizarre.

we Aren’t talking about just friends though, are we? People have repeatedly said about hobbies, work, obligations to family etc. I agree with what you say about friends, but surely you would make efforts to limit your exposure to the deliberately targeting con artist steak and wine guzzlers described above, if you were in contact with one?

I don't always eat out with close friends. At Christmas I went for meals out with a couple of hobby groups. We are all friendly, but not close friends. And as there were 11 of us at one meal and about 15 at another it was much easier for each of us to pay our own bill as we had all had very different things to eat, and not everyone had all the courses. We paid for our own drinks at the bar separately.

Last time we ate out with close friends we split the bill because it was a set menu.

We only got stung once - I posted about it upthread, but TBH I don't know anyone who would pull that stunt on me anyway, and if anyone tried it I would probably use the line that @WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll used and say "I'm not subsidising your meal"

PP's have said that people shouldn't go out if they can't afford to split - specific mention was made of how they'd prefer to have their friends round.

It was clearly meant for friends.

I am always happy to split - but then when doing so would never take the piss and would not choose really expensive stuff (unless everyone else was and I fancied it). I am typically not worried about booze - sometimes I partake sometimes I don't, it evens out.

I can see the rationale to want to pay for what you have. If you leave it to the end of the meal to communicate this, it can be toe curling and cringe. Whether you intend it or not, it sort of sends the message that you think everyone else has been a bit of greedy bastard compared to you. It makes it look as though you have been monitoring what everyone else has been ordering and making judgments. It sucks the joy out.

If you want to do this, please say at the outset. Before the ordering starts. I would have no issue with this - and it would not affect my own ordering (save that if we were all paying for exactly what we consume, I would order exactly what I wanted regardless of cost - so I would not inhibit my ordering)

Also if you are the one insisting on this - then you should be the one at the end of meal calculating it out for everyone. Don't be the person who says, I only had a lasagne and a Diet Coke, here is my share and leave it to someone else to figure it out.

“This time”?

That's what I always say when 'offered' a less than thrilling financial proposition. Every single time would just so happen to be 'this time' - regardless of how the meal sub-seeker or anybody else dining there might choose to interpret it.

I don’t understand what you’re saying, sorry. Can you explain it more fully?

I don’t understand what you’re saying, sorry. Can you explain it more fully?

I thought you were questioning why I specified 'this time', when I admittedly wouldn't have done it or be doing it at all? Sorry if I've misconstrued.

It's my standard to say "I won't this time" e.g. when asked to buy charity raffle tickets in a shop or whatever for a charity that I don't wish to support for my own reasons - and I say it every time - as it sounds a bit more diplomatic and gets the message across more quickly.

However, it can also have an extra forceful nuance in scenarios like the advantage-taking bill-splitter, as it leaves open the potential interpretation (whether it's happened or not) that the person frothing about 'stingy people who come out for meals when they can't afford it' isn't trying it on as a one-off.

At any rate, the 'this time' is probably not that important! All I was really trying to convey was that the phrase "I can't afford to treat you" (rather than "I can't afford to split the bill" - which they will invariably interpret as 'I can't afford to pay my share') takes the blame off yourself and puts it squarely and clearly where it belongs, thus taking the wind out of their sails and leaving them and the other members of the group in no doubt at all as to who the unreasonable one is!

I really don't seem to come across all these people who take advantage. Most people I know would split the bill but make quick adjustments for more expensive things/ cocktails/ extra courses. Not for the sake of a couple of quid though. And in my social circles it's the person that's ordered more that insists on paying extra (rather than waiting for the one who ordered less to speak up). Honestly never have this problem!