Person A moved away a number of years ago and is visiting back to nearby their old hometown (about an hour away) for a few
and wants to meet with some friends.
Arranges plan with B, C & D to meet on specific day and time. Suggests to meet either halfway between where A is staying and where C & D live or in the large town where A is staying. B lives at the halfway point.
C decides that D probably can’t afford to eat out (without consulting D) so suggests to D on a group chat that we all go to D’s home. B, C accept but A now cannot join them as it impacts on another commitment.
A hadn’t made it clear they had another commitment afterwards. A was aware that C wasn’t sure D could afford it but hadn’t specifically told C not to suggest they went to D’s home.
A is pissed off with C for changing the original plan and feels hurt and excluded. Feels C has prioritised D. B, C and D all live nearby and can meet regularly.
B is unaware of the situation at all and had initially agreed to meet somewhere.
C doesn’t think they have done anything wrong . Was trying to be kind to D so they didn’t feel embarrassed or have to decline.
D is also unaware that C has made changes on their behalf without their knowledge. And that it has resulted in A not being able to attend a get together arranged specifically because they were around.
A doesn’t want to cause upset and doesn’t feel they can ask the group to revert back to the original plan as thinks D will say they can’t do it and that then leaves C and B to choose which isn’t fair.
So is A unreasonable in feeling hurt and should just suck it up?
Or is C unreasonable in how they have handled it?