Should petrol money and accommodation be charged?

[PinkStarAtNight]

I am looking for opinions on whether a person should be charged petrol money and accommodation fees or not.

So the situation is, person A and person B agreed to go on holiday with each other and booked a holiday together last year. They paid half for the holiday itself and, because it involves person A driving them there, they of course agreed they would split the petrol money.

Months later, person C, who is a close family member of person A, is going through a tough time and was invited to tag along on the holiday as they live alone and are struggling.

There is now a debate as to whether person C should pay a third of the petrol money and a third of the accommodation costs.

Accommodation has already been paid in full between person A and B, so paying for accommodation would involve person C handing over cash to person A and B to make it so they have essentially all paid a third each. And petrol money would be split three ways on the days of travel.

So...
Should person C pay an equal share of accommodation and petrol?

Or should they not have to pay, because person A and B planned this trip a while ago and would be paying half regardless of whether person C attends or not.

Person C will not be increasing costs in any way as the accommodation has always been big enough for three people, as person A and B booked a large caravan. Person C has agreed that they will not be dictating what happens on the holiday or factored into any decisions or plans for the activities, as they are only going because they don't want to be alone right now.

Also, does it make a difference that person C is close family member of one of the original people?

C has to be dc or dp of A and it sounds like a shit show!

Is the holiday this weekend? What has happened?

Person C 100% should pay a third and if not should be paying 100% of petrol costs as a compromise.

Person C should split the cost or if person A feels so strongly, cover it for them.

Person B arranged this holiday thinking it was just the two of them. Maybe they don’t even want to have a third person go. Maybe they aren’t fond of third person or maybe they think they would be a bit of a Debbie downer and they’re needing the holiday themselves to wind down.

Why should person B compensate person C, simply because they want to go on holiday?

If my friend suddenly decided to bring her relative along and expect me to fork out I would be annoyed too.

Who invited person C?
that’s very important to know

A B and C (A and C are family members)..

Holiday costs £130 (just found real prices)

Current:
A - 65
B - 65
C - 0

Either:
They all pay the same.. this is the fairest C pays A and B £32.50 each..

Or If A wants C to free (as they are connected), A pays B So B is not out of pocket.. or gets C to pay £32.0 to B .. C gets a cheaper holiday subsidised by A.

A pays £97.50 (by giving £32.50 to B)
B pays £63 ( a third of the holiday)
OR
C pays £32.50 to B ( - A is out of pocket.. but doesn't seem to mind.. and C has a bargain holiday)

A is not so bothered about the money, wants C to come .. whereas B -sounds more like they have accepted C will come.. They all get 1 room 1/3 of the bathroom etc (I'd say it was unreasonable to expect B to subsidise C..)

Person C needs to pay up, that’s the fair way, one third each!

If B quibbles about paying a third of £40 instead of £10 per person for bedding you can guarantee that person B is going to want to split everything exactly three ways.
Intrigued how a 4 berth caravan could sleep 3 without making the double bed up!

I feel sorry for Person B, having their planned holiday with A hijacked. Person B should really have been given the option to cancel if A really couldn't have left C alone. Maybe A and C could have reimbursed B and gone together instead.

I feel sorry for Person A, having Person C totally dependent on their presence and essentially holding them "prisoner" in the house. It sounds like Person C isn't in a great place, but they should really reflect on whether the demands they are making of A are reasonable and if there is anything they could do (stay with someone/have someone else visit) so A can still have some freedom to live their life.

And yes totally unreasonable for B to be expected to subsidise C when they be probably wouldn't have gone on holiday with them in the first place, given the choice. Though it would be very nice if they chose to do so as a favour to A, who seems to have rather a lot to deal with atm.

Seems mean minded and uncharitable to charge the extra person. If I were person A or B I wouldn’t take any money from the extra person. I’d expect them to help with paying for food and generally mucking in and looking after the place.

This sounds an awful situation for person B and if they truly look to save money, I can't see how you think it acceptable to not split costs.
However much I like someone, the thought of spending my few days break away with someone suffering a complete breakdown sounds draining, there is no way this will not affect the enjoyment or dynamics of this break away.

Person A has the costs of maintenance, insurance, vehicle tax , wear and tear etc. and is doing the driving so B and C should actually take care of all the fuel costs.

Rubbish. If I was the driver there’s no way I’d allow this. I’d prefer to drive and the running costs of the car are negligible. A single journey has no impact on them.

I agree. It all sounds a bit nit picky and depressing to me.

Maybe person C could pay the bedding fee as a sign of goodwill