Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Who is in the right here? Cost sharing argument

198 replies

JoelyJoe · 27/01/2025 10:38

I would be very interested in people's opinions on this...

A large group are going on a ski holiday together. Different people are doing car shares to the airport.

Kate and Ben (couple), offer lifts to Gary and Simon (both single). Gary and Simon both have their own cars, and in reality would rather take one of those as Kate and Ben's is a bit ropey. But they don't want to be impolite, and accept the offer. Everyone is sharing costs for petrol and airport parking.

On the way back from the airport after the holiday, the car breaks down. Cue massive hassle, hours of waiting on the motorway for AA pick up. Kate and Ben don't have AA membership so want Gary and Simon to use one of their pick up allowances. They both refuse as they think Kate and Ben should have had their own cover for their car. Kate and Ben then have to pay full, non members price for pick-up, and want Gary and Simon to share the costs.

Again, they refuse, on the grounds that the car could have broken down at any time and it is not their responsibilty to cover their maintenance costs.

Kate is furious and sends an email a few days after the event saying how disappointed she is in them.

Gary and Simon are not budging, saying thay both have perfectly good cars of their own, which they pay to maintain and cover for breakdowns, and they should not be expected to cover Kate and Ben's expenses if they chose not to do this.

Who is right?
YABU - Gary and Simon were in the car, they should share the costs.
YANBU - Kate and Ben are responsible for their own car.

OP posts:
Choccyscofffy · 27/01/2025 12:04

OverthinkingOlive · 27/01/2025 12:02

This. Ken and Ben are twats

Show quote history

Ken and Ben 😂

BIossomtoes · 27/01/2025 12:05

Lurkingandlearning · 27/01/2025 11:35

If Gary or Simon had used their recovery membership they would have found their renewal price a lot more expensive. Like when you make a claim on insurance. I think (not sure)

Wrong. It doesn’t work like that.

Pieandchips999 · 27/01/2025 12:05

I voted YABU because they refused to use their pick ups. I don't really think they should pay but they should have done something to get recovered easily for free. They could have also said no to the lift or offered themselves.

narkyspirit · 27/01/2025 12:06

Gary and Simon are unreasonable to have not used their AA membership to recover the car

Choccyscofffy · 27/01/2025 12:07

BloominNora · 27/01/2025 12:03

It's not an entitlement its a reaction to the part of the OP which said they accepted the lift despite concerns so as not to seem impolite.

Therefore one can assume that politeness is important to them (although the actions around the AA membership perhaps negates that) and if someone offers you a lift which you are prepared to accept in principal but you are concerned about their car or driving then it is only polite to offer a lift in return if you are going to say no!

Show quote history

No, someone offering you a lift does not mean you have to offer them one too!

You can’t hold their wish to be polite against them like that!

Barrenfieldoffucks · 27/01/2025 12:07

JustMarriedBecca · 27/01/2025 10:42

I think couple are in the wrong. If you have a dodgy car, you have cover for it and it's their fault they didn't. That said, if I was a friend I'd have used my AA pick up and/or got friends a discount.
We have AA cover and have never run out of free rescues. Didn't even know that was a thing.

Agreed, I would have used a pick up for definite. I wouldn't pay cash money though

niadainud · 27/01/2025 12:07

AccordionedWhileMallBurned · 27/01/2025 11:58

No, what I'm saying is that if they can't afford breakdown cover, or breakdown cover with sufficient call-outs, there are cheaper holiday options than ski-ing if they want a getaway. They should 'cut their cloth according to their means'.

Show quote history

Ah, I see. Fair enough then, I agree.

HollyKnight · 27/01/2025 12:10

It is the responsibility of the car owners to maintain their car and have breakdown cover if they don't want the expense of a breakdown. I'm surprised though that neither Gary or Simon would help their friends out via their own policies. But, regardless, neither Gary or Simon are responsible for paying the resulting bill. I would be questioning those friendships though. I can't imagine any of my friends being that petty.

BaoLi · 27/01/2025 12:10

This is a skiing holiday. Nobody is skint are there. It is just nice manners to offer to your membership for the road side assistance if it would cover it (rather than make Kate and Ben try and navigate a non-member emergency rate). It would also be much quicker.

Total arsehole move to say I have applicable cover but I am not letting you use it. In these shoes, as Kate and Ben I would be ok cool - are you ordering cab from here then? I will reimburse your petrol contribution from here to home. Let me know you get home safely. We will wait for our breakdown assistance. Good luck with the onward journey.

BloominNora · 27/01/2025 12:13

Choccyscofffy · 27/01/2025 12:07

No, someone offering you a lift does not mean you have to offer them one too!

You can’t hold their wish to be polite against them like that!

Show quote history

No it doesn't mean you have to, but basic politeness suggests you should.

If they had just said "Thanks for the offer but we'll make our own way there" as they had no intention of sharing lifts then not offering back is fine.

It's the fact that they were prepared to accept the offer which makes it polite to offer back given the (somewhat founded) concerns about the car.

If you are prepared to accept a favour from someone but not prepared to offer the same in return (or similar level if you can't offer exactly the same) then that absolutely makes you selfish!

MyDeftDuck · 27/01/2025 12:15

Doesn't AA membership cover the person and not the car - as in someone could use their AA membership in another vehicle???
If that isn't the case then the couple are out of order for expecting Gary and Simon to pay towards to vehicle recovery.

Fencehedge · 27/01/2025 12:16

It would have been nice for Kate & Ben to benefit from the AA perks available to the others, so they are justified in feeling sighted, but it's not worth falling out over, and they can't get angry at anyone else that their own car was at fault.

If they're all genuine friends then it can be forgotten / laughed about. If not, that's that.

Ponderingg · 27/01/2025 12:18

Gary and Simon should have a) offered to drive if they didn’t want to be in the dodgy car and b) used their pick up allowance. It was a dick move not to. Kate and Ben should have never asked them for money.

Choccyscofffy · 27/01/2025 12:20

I think the big clue here is that Op is on Gary and Simon’s side.

MrsJHernandez · 27/01/2025 12:21

Your car, your responsibility. I would never expect friends to cotribute to my breakdown costs. Totally unreasonable. You gonna charge them for wear and tear to the car too? The cost of your insurance? Road tax? Nope. Fuel money is the only reasonable expectation.

EvilNextDoor · 27/01/2025 12:22

I’m pretty sure way back when my breakdown cover only covered my car and had limited call outs. Could it have been that?

I think the whole situation it’s painting everyone in bad light. Saying that if my car broke down with passengers I would not expect them to cover any costs especially - and it’s kind of worse as they seemed to know their car was unreliable 🤷‍♀️

But they could have refused a lift…

Edited - I don’t think my cover was the AA

BobbyBiscuits · 27/01/2025 12:24

The car would've broken down regardless of whether Gary and Simon were in it. It's their car, their responsibility. But If I was Gary or Simon maybe used my allowance in the moment if it would've been cheaper, then asked the couple to reimburse some of the cost?
It seems awful to fall out over it. And Gary and Simon had their suspicions about the car. So they could've just refused the lift. Hindsight is a great thing though isn't it?
So it feels like the couple are wrong, but is it a hill to die on?

jolene7 · 27/01/2025 12:27

Gary and Ben are condescending and spiteful people and I can guarantee that politeness was not the reason they did not offer. They probably didn't want to put the mileage on their car. Even if I only had one pickup I would give it to friends in need. I would take the very small risk that I would breakdown that year for my mates.
I wonder if Kate asking them to contribute to the cost was an irrational response to her shock and anger from the selfishness of her so called friends.
Both in the wrong but mainly Gary and Ben.
And to those saying "it's their responsibility.... etc. OP isn't talking about legal obligations- she's talking about friendship.

PokerFriedDips · 27/01/2025 12:30

Everyone sounds unreasonable. Why are they all friends?

Yes Kate and Ben were in the wrong for not keeping their car well maintained or paying for their own rescue service subscription.

Gary and Simon were technically correct but unkind to not help at all.

An equitable solution would have been for Gary or Simon to use a free pickup but for Kate and Ben to pay Gary and Simon a contribution to the costs of their next renewals of their breakdown service in recognition that K&B shouldn't be able to profit from their skinflint decision with no consequences

Gymmum82 · 27/01/2025 12:30

Choccyscofffy · 27/01/2025 12:02

Maybe Kate and Ben were awful in the car to Gary and Simon, which influenced their decision.

You have no idea what happened on the journey.

Maybe Gary or Simon only had 2 call outs a year and had already used one? Maybe they only had 1 call out allowance?

I definitely remember a limitation of 2 call outs on a basic policy at one time.

Edited
Show quote history

No and neither do you! Why would they be going on holiday with people that are ‘awful’

Either way it’s nobbish behaviour to refuse to use your AA membership to help a friend

JustMyView13 · 27/01/2025 12:31

Age of a car is irrelevant, it’s not smart to not have any breakdown cover. I say that as someone whose relative broke down on a major motorway with less than 1k on the clock of their car. It can happen. As can objects flying across the road and making your car un-drivable, as can old cars break down due to age etc. It’s simply ‘the joys of motoring’.

I have AA cover and it covers me for any car I’m in. So personally wouldn’t be in this situation and would happily use my own cover for this scenario (and have in the past). I don’t have a limit though (or if I did, it’s like 5 times - which I’d be questioning my luck at 4!).

Choccyscofffy · 27/01/2025 12:32

BloominNora · 27/01/2025 12:13

No it doesn't mean you have to, but basic politeness suggests you should.

If they had just said "Thanks for the offer but we'll make our own way there" as they had no intention of sharing lifts then not offering back is fine.

It's the fact that they were prepared to accept the offer which makes it polite to offer back given the (somewhat founded) concerns about the car.

If you are prepared to accept a favour from someone but not prepared to offer the same in return (or similar level if you can't offer exactly the same) then that absolutely makes you selfish!

Show quote history

That doesn’t make much sense, but as I’ve ready said, Kate and Ben may not be the best at reimbursing petrol and parking costs, so that’s a possible reason why G&S didn’t offer a lift.

The point is we don’t know why.

Sherararara · 27/01/2025 12:32

Kate and Ben can afford a ski holiday but not to maintain their car or have breakdown cover?

JessicafelloffTheKnappett · 27/01/2025 12:33

jolene7 · 27/01/2025 12:27

Gary and Ben are condescending and spiteful people and I can guarantee that politeness was not the reason they did not offer. They probably didn't want to put the mileage on their car. Even if I only had one pickup I would give it to friends in need. I would take the very small risk that I would breakdown that year for my mates.
I wonder if Kate asking them to contribute to the cost was an irrational response to her shock and anger from the selfishness of her so called friends.
Both in the wrong but mainly Gary and Ben.
And to those saying "it's their responsibility.... etc. OP isn't talking about legal obligations- she's talking about friendship.

Wow jolene, you sound angry!

Nothing OP has said indicate that Gary or Simon are spiteful. We don't know why they didn't use their call out, but the fact that both said No probably means there's a back story.

Scout2016 · 27/01/2025 12:36

No one made Gary and Simon accept the lift, they chose to. It's not Kate and Ben's fault that their friends accepted a favour they didn't actually want, it shouldn'tbe held against them.

Gary and Simon were dicks for refusing to use their call out allowance. Two faced about the luft, utterly mean spirited about helping out and not what I'd want in friends.