Going Out for a Meal - The Awkward Moment When Someone Says...

adouglasmhor

elvis86 wrote: »

I'm going to say something that will shock the more tightfisted amongst you;

I don't actually mind paying for a friend's drink. Or for a relatives' dessert. Even if I've not had one.
.

Up to you then, I have been on a night out where people have ordered several pitchers of cocktails - no bloody way was I subsidising them getting a buzz on. I don't think I am tightfisted and neither did the others when I said no to splitting the bill.

jetplane

I go out with different groups of friends and they each have different ways but they are always decided at the onset before we get too drunk to care. It is difficult to get split bills in some restaurants and when we do pay for our own its usually a rounded up version.

I agree it's hard to speak up if you're concerned that people will say you're tight but personally I think anyone who guzzles their way through a meal and doesn't expect to offer that bit extra is just bad mannered and why would you want to subsidise someone like that?

However one particular large group I go out with is a chore because they each get the bill and put in the exact amount, it takes ages and some even go here's my money I must dash ... I agree it's not a good end to the night.

Another lot we give the bill to one girl 'cos she's good with sums and she just asks what we had and tells us what we owe.

If we are splitting the bill equally and some people in the group aren't drinking alcohol then we just miss them off the drinks bill.

I would always take extra as I would hate to be embarrased, however no one should be excluded from a night out because they can't afford / don't want to subsidise someone else.

fluffymuffy

It's always the same people who are winners and losers in bill splitting. It doesn't balance itself out over several meals. Those who eat more and drink more do that every time.

[Deleted User]

Here's being controversial - i've found that women are more awkward when it comes to splitting the bill than men.

Blokes will generally eat about the same, drink about the same, then not get to fussed when the bill is split.

When it came to my wife's 30th birthday, we went to a nice restaurant, everyone knew it was £25 a head each and I settled everyones drinks bill and paid for her best friend who had traveled a long way to get there. Cost a couple of hundred quid but it made for a lot less fuss. I didn't tell them I was paying the drinks bill until the bill was due

elvis86

adouglasmhor wrote: »

Up to you then, I have been on a night out where people have ordered several pitchers of cocktails - no bloody way was I subsidising them getting a buzz on. I don't think I am tightfisted and neither did the others when I said no to splitting the bill.

Some what you might call "militant moneysavers" (ie the type who will order something they detest in a restuarant just because it's the cheapest option) have attempted to skew this discussion so they don't look as cheap. But like most people, I have been referring specifically to the kind of scenario the OP described, where the difference isn't a great deal (eg it was an all-you-can-eat restuarant and the "difference" the OP paid in addition to what she actually consumed was a fiver).

If there's a massive difference between what people have consumed, then the person who ordered the lobster or the 2 bottles of wine when their friend had a salad and 2 cokes should obviously offer to pay more. If they don't then it's not unreasonable for the person who consumed much less to say something.

But where it's the difference of a pudding or an extra drink, the value of which is as small as a fiver, it's tightfisted to argue over it. And if your budget is so tight that such a small amount of money will break the bank, you shouldn't be eating out. You should spend the £X you strictly budgeted for the meal on something more essential.

sassyblue

fluffymuffy wrote: »

It's always the same people who are winners and losers in bill splitting. It doesn't balance itself out over several meals. Those who eat more and drink more do that every time.

Too true! I have an uncle who'll indulge in starters, the most expensive main course and doubles for drinks - of course, he's the one suggesting the bill's split at the end too. We've got wise to him now and say beforehand 'no splitting the bill, we're feeling the pinch' and guess what he doesn't order half of what he normally does. :cool:

I'm happy to split the bill but not when there's someone taking the pi55.

SandC

ringo_24601 wrote: »

Here's being controversial - i've found that women are more awkward when it comes to splitting the bill than men.

Blokes will generally eat about the same, drink about the same, then not get to fussed when the bill is split.

When it came to my wife's 30th birthday, we went to a nice restaurant, everyone knew it was £25 a head each and I settled everyones drinks bill and paid for her best friend who had traveled a long way to get there. Cost a couple of hundred quid but it made for a lot less fuss. I didn't tell them I was paying the drinks bill until the bill was due

What a very nice thing to do!

elvis86

sassyblue wrote: »

Too true! I have an uncle who'll indulge in starters, the most expensive main course and doubles for drinks - of course, he's the one suggesting the bill's split at the end too. We've got wise to him now and say beforehand 'no splitting the bill, we're feeling the pinch' and guess what he doesn't order half of what he normally does. :cool:

I'm happy to split the bill but not when there's someone taking the pi55.

That is obviously disgusting behaviour on the part of your uncle. But in my experience, most people suggest splitting because it's easier and they've enjoyed the food and company and don't feel the need to quibble over a couple of quid.

If I was sad enough to sit down and do the sums on every occasion I've split the bill, I honestly reckon I'd end up roughly breaking even. Sometimes I've had a side order where a couple of others haven't, perhaps an extra drink when I've been thirstier than others, but then on other occassions I've had no room for dessert but others have indulged, or I've turned down a hot drink where filter was the only choice, and stuck with my glass of wine whilst others had a coffee.:)

tinktinktinkerbell

elvis86 wrote: »

Some what you might call "militant moneysavers" (ie the type who will order something they detest in a restuarant just because it's the cheapest option)

im not one of those types, i order something because i like it not because its the cheapest

PasturesNew

elvis86 wrote: »

And if your budget is so tight that such a small amount of money will break the bank, you shouldn't be eating out. You should spend the £X you strictly budgeted for the meal on something more essential.

Some might argue that going out 1-2x a year, to spend a limited amount on a meal out is an essential. You can't expect poor people to sit in, alone, in their bedsit 365 days of the year, surely?