Birthday bill split

[KnickerlessFatWoman]

Last weekend was my mother’s birthday, so we - that’s me, my parents, sister and BIL and their 12 year-old son - went for Sunday lunch. Unfortunately the food wasn’t great, and they ended up taking my main off the bill.

My dad is someone who always wants to treat everyone, so my sister and I decided this time it was our turn and we were going to treat him and our mum instead. When the bill came, BIL asked if we could split it over two cards, but they said they could only take one payment. He paid and I said I’d transfer my share. For the sake of keeping the maths simple on this thread, let’s say the bill was £210, or £35 per head.

Both BIL and sister are crap at responding to messages, so it took me until midweek to get the bank details. I sent over £70 to cover me and one of my parents.

I heard nothing in response, but I was chatting to my mum earlier and she said “Oh, by the way, Katie said you got the money wrong - it was £210 and you only sent £70”. I said no, that was right - my meal and one other. She said, “Ohhh… I think she thought you were splitting it”. I laughed and said, “No, we said we’d treat you and Dad. I didn’t say I’d pay for three meals!”

I don’t really know why my sister couldn’t just have messaged me instead of talking to our mother about it, but that’s not really the issue. Surely she and BIL don’t expect me to pay half the bill? By treating our parents, I meant exactly that - not that I’d pay for them both while my sister just paid for her own family (which is what this amounts to). There are three of them and one of me. If I pay half the bill, sister and BIL have only covered themselves and their child - there’s no “treating” anyone at all.

AIBU for thinking £70 was my share and paying just that?

Splitting over two cards doesn’t necessarily mean splitting 50/50.

Don't get me wrong: your Dsis has behaved abominably.

It was just my take that, given your dad so often shouts everyone, I'd have accepted a misinterpretation and put it down to experience - ie; make absolutely certain your Dsis knows what you have agreed to next time.

We can only give advice as to how we would handle things Op. I feel sorry for your parents it has come to this, and, for that reason, that was my advice.

No it doesn't necessarily - but without qualification I think that is the most natural interpretation.

Jesus Christ. You have taken a fairly massive leap from a minor disagreement over a bill to some kind of nuclear fallout when my parents are dead.

Who the hell even responds to a thread by talking about the OP’s parents dying anyway?!

There was no need to clarify, as we were told we couldn’t do it.

Yes, I can see that - and actually that was where it all went wrong, because the next step would have been you telling him what to put on your card, which would have flagged up the differing expectations.

But if you post here, people will give advice as to what we would do from the point you are at - and that may differ from the advice we would give as a small claims court.

Why should I?

What would make me most pissy about the whole thing is that she’s told mum that you sent the wrong amount of money instead of speaking to you directly.

I do agree with the way you’ve calculated it but surely it should have been better clarified at the time.

Of course you shouldn’t have to pay for anyone in your sister’s nuclear family to dine out because it’s your mums birthday.

Why would she even mention this to your Mum?!

OP, I’ve read all your posts and think you are great, too! It’s given me a good laugh and I’m glad you are sticking up for yourself.

You sound absolutely awful.

Honestly.

OP didn’t cause any drama, anyway. There hasn’t been any except if you count dsis dragging mum into it.

No, OP is not unreasonable and her sister (and Bil) is a CF. But, yes, the sister telling their mum that OP got the amount owed wrong is an issue.

But if I paid half, that would be suddenly incurred extra costs for me! Why should I be the one to incur the costs?

It wouldn’t cross my mind to clarify this. “I’m paying for my meal, not your family.”

Who expects someone to cover their people on a check?

🤮🤮🤮

Agree you shouldn’t pay half , but maybe it should have been split by number of adults ( 210/5) , how much did your nephew eat anyway

Why?

What I realised is that it's lucky you never put it all on your card, as sister would only have transferred over 50% to you, instead of the correct amount i.e. her meal, BIL & nephew + one parent's meal.

I can see from this thread, and your sister's appalling actions in telling your mum, spoiling the treat, that she has form for being an entitled madam.

Glad you are standing up for yourself against all the people who think your cheeky fucker sister is in the right. She's bloody not.

So many people not reading your comments properly too which is annoying, OP never said they were splitting the bill, she said they would both treat their parents, so logically, that means each sister will pay for one parent. Why the fuck are people thinking OP should have paid for some of her sister's/BIL/nephew's meal?!

Also, in terms of "splitting a bill", why does everyone on here assume that means a 50/50 split? A bill can be split with people paying for what they've had. Surely "split down the middle", or "split in half", should be the terms used for people expecting a 50/50 split, rather than split proportionally to who had what.

What does this mean?

Why doesn’t it “sit comfortably” with you? Why should I cover the entire bill for my parents, but my sister and BIL pay nothing?

@burnoutbabe perhaps OP's sister should stop being so damn entitled, expecting other people to always pay for her meals.

Jeez. I had an element of empathy for OP in the beginning of the thread but I’ve really revised my opinion.

I can’t imagine anyone actually wanting to sit for a meal and eat with someone so very unpleasant.

What the fuck?

I know what a family is, thank you.

It matters because we said WE’D treat our parents. Not that I’d treat them and my sister and her family would also be in the room.