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

FatVonD

PasturesNew wrote: »

I had this when out with a couple. Both had been continously employed in high paying jobs forever. Their house, costing peanuts nearly 30 years ago was paid for, no kids. All their money was for fun, fun, fun. Income wise, my income as a household was about 1/8th of theirs. We went to the pub, I bought a half (me), pint (him), soft drink (her). Next he bought the same round. Then they thought it was my turn again. I explained it to them... and they seemed to have to get their heads round the fact that everybody buys a round.... and it wasn't my turn until she'd bought one.

An old friend of mine would assume she didn't buy rounds as she was part of a couple (incidentally the same couple as the bloke that would over order at the Indian restaurant :eek: ) One day one of his flatmates bought a round and didn't include her and he pointed out that his flatmate had forgotten to her her a drink to which he replied 'no I didn't, she never buys a round so why should I buy her one'. I'd have been way too embarrassed to say it but there wasn't a person in our crowd that didn't admire him for it

FatVonD

elvis86 wrote: »

I wish them good luck as they sit in silence with a group of equally tightfisted cretins

Hmmm, I think you're actually winding us up (bad Elvis ) because if your attitude in real life stank anything like this I doubt you'd have any friends.

The junior in my department at work went out for lunch the other day with a group of similarly-aged, similar-salary mates, the only difference being that the others all still live at home while she flat shares so has less disposable income. She couldn't afford to eat out so she ate the sandwich she'd brought with her before they went and went along just for a drink and a chat. Does this make her a tightfisted cretin? They didn't seem to think so, she's a well-liked member of that circle of friends and the gathering would have been less fun without her so they were quite happy for her to just buy her own drink.

ipod_killed_the_musicshop

rose_blanche wrote: »

Hmm, this strikes a chord! Went out with OH's family to a fancy french restaurant for a birthday celebration. We really don't have any spare cash (which they are fully aware of), so just chose the main dish of the day at £10 each. We had a glass each of the wine ordered. No idea what it was, or the cost, as we didn't see the wine menu, it was ordered by the family. We assumed we would all pay our own way...

His brother ordered live lobster, freshly prepared sole and a grand manier souffle. He turned out to be the main !!!! taker, but all the others had starters, mains, puddings and coffee and liquers.

So, when the bill came and the brother insisted it be split, instead of £20 plus wine, so say £30 total, we were asked for £150 it came as a bit of a shock!

Yes, it is nice to enjoy a meal with family, but there are limits. Never will we be caught again....

Woah! I thought it was bad when we went out in Brick Lane - we had Biryani and 1 cider each from what I remember, while others were ordering 2 plus beers (more expensive than the cider, and I prefer beer) poppadoms on the side etc. But £150 when you've bought £30 worth? I know it's easier said than done, but you should really have put your foot down over that.

kj*daisy

rose_blanche wrote: »

Hmm, this strikes a chord! Went out with OH's family to a fancy french restaurant for a birthday celebration. We really don't have any spare cash (which they are fully aware of), so just chose the main dish of the day at £10 each. We had a glass each of the wine ordered. No idea what it was, or the cost, as we didn't see the wine menu, it was ordered by the family. We assumed we would all pay our own way...

His brother ordered live lobster, freshly prepared sole and a grand manier souffle. He turned out to be the main !!!! taker, but all the others had starters, mains, puddings and coffee and liquers.

So, when the bill came and the brother insisted it be split, instead of £20 plus wine, so say £30 total, we were asked for £150 it came as a bit of a shock!

Yes, it is nice to enjoy a meal with family, but there are limits. Never will we be caught again....

I would honestly have just said NO and paid the £30!!! That is truly taking advantage. And with family I would be more likely to say it than with friends. I have friends who have more money than me, when we go out we will split the bill if all had roughly the same, but sometimes they want to be extravagant and drink lots of wine, so then we pay for what we've had.

People who have the expensive stuff and then expect the bill to be split are taking advantage of the good nature/politeness of others. They are the impolite ones expecting those who may have less disposable income than them to pick up the bill.

Once I went on holiday with a group of girls, I knew a couple were really struggling for money so when another couple in the group ordered all the expensive food and then expected the bill to be split, I made it quite clear we'd all be paying for our own. One of the expensive eaters then piped up "I'm not sure I have enough money on me to pay for it". So why on earth did she order food she couldn't pay for!! Think she had to go find a cash point at that stage.

Lunar_Eclipse

Fredula wrote: »

Does it annoy you as much as it annoys me? Is there any way to get around it without everyone thinking you're a tight wad?

Yes it sometimes annoys me, but no there isn't in my opinion.

I have never been out for a meal where the bill isn't split. It's the done thing, so in accepting an invitation to a meal out, I do so knowing this, effectively subsidising the drinkers and those with expensive tastes.

To be honest though, I think an evening meal out for £20 is cheap (our local curry last week was £34/head with shared starters, no dessert and limited alcohol) so I'd be happy paying an extra £5 or so, it's when it's an extra £40+ that I start to feel rather hard done by, which is easier done that one might think. I mentally budget £100 for a meal out for the two of us if we're out with friends (but we always pay by credit card so I don't 'stick to a budget'.)

If we're out for someone's birthday, I'd also be prepared to split the bill to cover the birthday person's, without them paying. I think this is fairly common too, so I'm in agreement that £20 was not enough, given the knowledge about meal cost (£16) before going.

FBaby

I think there is also a difference between a one off celebration (in that case, I will make sure to starve before I go and eat my share of the bill!!!) and a regulat monthly meal out with the same people. If everytime we go out, I were to end up paying say £10 than the actual cost of my meal when someone pays £10 less than their actual cost, that's an extra cost of £120 a year extra for me and save for them.

If you went on holiday with friends, with them staying 10 days and you 7, would you find it right that you decided to share the cost of the holiday, despite them enjoying an extra 3 days of it (say you can only have a week off work)?

poet123

I don't actually notice what others order though, or the cost of them.

FBaby

poet123 wrote: »

I don't actually notice what others order though, or the cost of them.

I think in some cases, it is not so much a symptom of generosity than of selective attentiveness

poet123

FBaby wrote: »

I think in some cases, it is not so much a symptom of generosity than of selective attentiveness

Not sure what you mean? I order what I want and expect others to do the same. I don't keep a running tab of what x has had and what y has had as compared to me. That isn't what I go out for

FBaby

What I mean is that it is more natural to notice a difference when you are the one losing out than the one ending up paying less than what they cost. It also means that after a few glasses of wine, you are much less likely to care!

I am ALWAYS losing out...because I do not drink anything but water (my choice, it really is what I prefer to have with a meal), rarely have a starter because if I do, I usually struggle with the main meal, and don't have a dessert because I am not keen on them.

I am not sure what you are suggesting?
- that I eat significantly more than I normally would (and most likely end up feeling sick) and force myself to alcohol (which I hate), so that I don't end up paying significantly more each time than what I actually consume (even though it means that I will pay more than I would just sharing with me eating as I enjoy it)
- or do I have to accept that the fact I have a small appetite and don't like alcohol as a failure on my social capacities and therefore accept the punishment of paying significantly more for socialising with my friends than I would going out with my partner (because he also has a small appetite and would rarely have more than one beer)?