Do you divide up the cost per person or per rooom?

[NatureNatur]

Friend is hiring a house abroad for a big birthday (v short plane away) Around 5 couples going, and 3 singletons. It's for 4 days.

I have confirmed I am going, but said my DH will have to see closer to the time. We have young kids and no family who could have them for longer than one night really. Elderly or unwilling family either side.

Just had the cost through and it's £400 per person. I had thought it would be worked out by room - e.g. I can just pay to have a bedroom and if DH joins for one night - all good as he would be in my room. Was I unreasonable to presume this?

But it's costed per person - so would be £800 for a room, and the singletons pay £400 for their room.

Is this fair? Of course we can't justify DH paying £400 for one night so I'm going to need to say that and then i gues costs are going to go up for everyone so ppl aren't going to be happy and DH just stays home.

Do you divide up the overall cost by person or by bedroom?

B-girl is obscene imo. CF is an euphemism.

I don't understand?

Am I the only person that would have an issue with sending £400 to a friend to stay in accommodation that I hadn’t even seen? Maybe I’m just tight lol.

Maybe also untrusting as I’d also like to know the actual total cost of it!

It's obscene to expect people to come to your birtday party but paying for it. A high cost as well.

Ah ok!

The problem is when the singles want a room to themselves at half the cost that the couples are paying for the same room.

Paying per person and everyone sharing 2 to a room= fine

Paying per room and people choose to share or not = fine

Some people paying the same for a room to themselves as others are for half a shared room = not fine (unless there is an obvious discrepancy in rooms e.g. master ensuite v small single).

We really need to know how many bedrooms there are and how many are sleeping in each one.

This!!

Although i'd never spend £400 on a birthday trip for anyone anyway....

Per person

We have a similar situation with an extended family rental this summer.
We have gone for per person excluding DCs sleeping in their DPs room.

This means that Dnephew and niece have the huge en suite master with the gorgeous en suite bathroom because of their two young DCs, whilst we have a tiny double with shared bathroom. I am not wildly convinced everyone will cough up their share in the end, but am leaving it up to DH to sort out. I am planning to maybe not go for the full week, but will still count as a full share as it's not like anyone else can share the double room with DH.

There's no 100% fair way of doing it, but I think you're right to say that DH will bow out and can costs be rejigged accordingly.

I think it depends on the bedroom situation.
Do all couples/singles get their own room or are the singles expected to share? Is anyone being allocated to the sofa etc?

I'd presume per person unless 1) the singles get a double room each 2) someone is having to sleep on a pull out.

What on earth is degrading about 'singletons'?

I think split per person (if all adults). In my experience couples/families are always given the nicer/larger rooms with en suites etc. anyway. Also, for those saying the single people could share just like the couples do to keep costs down, this really isn’t the same. I’m no where near as relaxed if sharing with another person in the group as I would be sharing with my husband, especially if the rooms only have double beds rather than a twin. Xxx

When we book a cottage we divide the cost by nights. Then the nights be how many are sleeping... Sometimes dd joins for only 3 nights.. Those 3 nights she pays same as we pay per night making those nights cheaper for the rest. Dc aren't included in costs except food expenses which me and dh cover.. All paying adults pay the same regardless of room status.. We take turns who gets en suite every year..

It has to be per person, really. Just because some of those people are sharing a room is irrelevant - they are still being provided with all the facilities of the rental, same as everyone else.

Splitting it per room is hugely unfair on people who can't or don't want to share.

That said, I don't think someone coming for just one night should pay the same as everyone else.

If people don't want to share, they have to pay a premium for that. It's absolutely their choice.

If we're paying per person, DH and I would like 2 rooms, please (which obviously bumps up the cost for everyone as the number of bedrooms is generally the main indicator of price and a bigger house will be needed!). Is everyone OK with that? Because we apparently are when its a single person demanding their own room at no extra cost, bumping up the costs for everyone.

You can't possibly expect me to pay the same for half a room as someone else pays for a whole room? Obviously, I'd expect adjustments to be made for a master ensuite versus a small single, but most often nowadays villas have lots of gorgeous double ensuites, and all rooms are broadly equal. Why should a single person get to choose not to share and only pay half price for their room?

Realistically, a middle ground is probably what needs to be aimed for, with a set per person cost then a per room cost (or the room cost being adjusted in line with the size/facility of the rooms if they are significantly different).

But why should couples always subsidise single people's choice not to share? Why should we pay double for the same, just because we're in a couple?

Singles sharing should pay the same price per person as a person in a couple sharing.

Singles choosing the luxury of a whole room to themselves should pay more than anyone, regardless of relationship status, who is having to share, simply because they are getting the luxury of a private room, rather than the inconvenience/lack of privacy of a shared room.

Per person is much fairer.

It's really not.

It means couples subsidise singles, unless everyone is happy for people in couples to have a room each...

Per room, so if singles want to save £ they can bunk.

I don't think I can answer until you know the cost of the entire rental.

Rentals like that are generally not by room, it's a full cost per night. So 4 bedrooms, £800 per night would be £400 for the weekend. Per person sounds like they're trying to cover their own costs as a "booking fee".

If it’s per room then the singles are subsidising the couples (for the overall stay, the bedrooms being only part of the property).

Fwiw I’m part of a couple and wouldn’t expect a single friend to pay the same amount as we’ve paid for two people.

But they don't need a room each. You are just being petty for the sake of it, and at the expense of making it so the single people can't afford to come.

If you had two rooms, would you sleep separately to your DH? Or would you just be trying to make a point? Seems mean spirited to me. If you share a bed at home, you can share a bed on holiday.

And you have no idea if the single people know each other well enough to 'bunk up'. I wouldn't sleep well if I had someone unknown in my room/bed.

What a selfish attitude. PP means everyone on the holiday pays the same and is able to afford to go.

Couples share a room, but always get their first choice in who they share a room with, and it’s always somebody they’re very comfortable sharing with - their partner. It isn’t the same as being a single person who just has to bunk up with whoever else happens to be single and left over, whether you know them well them or not. It’s fine in a big group of friends who are all equally friendly with each other; it sucks if you’re the person who ends up sharing with your friend’s sister you’ve not met properly before.

If the rooms were just being allocated randomly, two people to each room, no choices about who your room partner was, I suspect the couples would instantly object to that - but it’s generally what they think single people should suck up.

How? (assuming all rooms are of equal quality)

They are each paying the same for the room, and getting the same room. The single pays more if they choose not to share because they are getting a whole private room to themselves. If they want to share, they can choose to share with another single and pay exactly the same per person as the people in a couple are paying per person for sharing a room. They can't expect to have the luxury of not sharing at the same cost as those sharing.

If the couple were two single people sharing rather than an a couple, do you still think the single with their own private room is subsidising the two singles sharing a room? Or is it just this weird notion that couples shouldn't benefit from sharing the costs when they're sharing spaces because they like spending time together.

Basically a couple shouldn't be treated less favourably than two single people just because of their relationships status. So if two single people get two rooms, then a couple also gets two rooms. If the two single people choose to share they pay half the room each. If the two people in a couple share they pay half the room each.

Or do you think two singles sharing should pay the same per person as a single having a double room to themselves? And if this is the case, are you happy being the single person sharing with another at the same cost as another single person having a private double room to themselves?

If all the rooms are equal, it should be per room. If couples will get bigger rooms than single people it should be per person. If single people have to share a room and couples don't couples should pay more.