Money Moral Dilemma: Is it mean to question my share of the bill?

boliston

svain wrote: »

You sound like a right blast :rotfl::rotfl: ... Still, im sure saving that few quid must feel very satisfying for you ..... I bet there is a few rolled eyes around your table

It's not really a case of "saving" - it's just paying your bill!

I normally ask to pay on my card as I don't often carry much cash, but I was caught out once when someone had put the whole table's bill on their card and asked for people to give them cash - in the end I managed to get their bacs details as I explained I was planning on using my own card to pay instead of cash.

Spendless

I wouldn't assume your soft drinks are cheaper. Recently at the theatre I went to get me a glass of wine and DD a coke. The 2nd time I went to the bar, I ordered 2 cokes. The 2nd round was the more expensive.

The easiest way to make sure you only pay for what you're drinking is to go up to the bar and buy your own, don't let your drinks be part of the tab.

SandraDJ

I don't like this business of equal splitting of the bill. It's one reason that I don't go to office evenings out any more - I'm sure one person racks the bill up deliberately knowing that she won't be paying her share.


I don't drink, because I'm driving, and there's no way that sparkling water or lime and soda equates to a few glasses of wine.


I rarely have more than a main course, because that's generally all that I want/need.


I'm vegetarian, so usually end up having the cheapest things on the menu.


I wish people were more understanding that we can't all afford to subsidise someone else's evening out.

PasturesNew

svain wrote: »

You sound like a right blast ... Still, im sure saving that few quid must feel very satisfying for you ..... I bet there is a few rolled eyes around your table

That is the sort of typical bullying behaviour and response from the sort of person we encounter.

It's not "a few quid" - and if I've only got a few quid then it's the difference between going out or not.

Quite often I've been out and tossed £10 on a table, having spent £8, where the split bill would've been £40. That is a FORTUNE to a lot of people.

Only a bully would go out expecting those with less to subsidise their lifestyle without a by your leave.... it's a special level of "expectation" and sense of entitlement.

I'd not care if eyes rolled... my eyes would have already been rolling when you had the AUDACITY to expect me to pay for YOUR choices.

If you can't afford to pay your own way, stay at home!

SarahTG

We always split the food bill but alcohol is shared between those who drank it. Fairest way. And this is by agreement. If someone says they are skint and has only ordered one course as a result, they only pay for that. But as we are friends, if someone is skint, we usually put together to treat them anyway. And no - I am not rich, probably due to believing in sharing with others who are my friends....

PasturesNew

Re drinks - it's not just a cost comparison of "the most expensive soft drink" -v- "a cheap bottle of wine".... but also frequency of drinking and quantity.

I will usually have one half a cider with a meal, maximum. Others round the table will have 3-4 drinks AND a brandy.

When out in, say, pubs, I'll quite often be sipping my half a cider, as others are sinking three pints across three rounds.

pollypenny

Mojisola wrote: »

That depends on your social group. There's often one or two people in a group who never seem to reciprocate the good turns done by others.

My friends have proved themselves real friends on many occasions.

We all met when our boys played mini rugby 35 years ago. Wow, that's hard to believe.

When my old colleagues met, we tend to pay for our own. It's usually lunch, with considerable variety.

Edit to add: if some are really pushing the boat out and treating themselves, as Pastures says, it's a cheek to expect a non-drinker to split the bill.

Pollycat

pollypenny wrote: »

Edit to add: if some are really pushing the boat out and treating themselves, as Pastures says, it's a cheek to expect a non-drinker to split the bill.

Yes it is a cheek.

If we do go out for a meal with friends (rarely as we eat very slowly and wouldn't want to be in a position where we're still eating our starter and someone else is chaffing to get his main course) it's with like-minded people who would drink wine with the meal so it's pretty easy to order bottles of red and white and share the bill at the end of the evening.

What I do dislike is this scenario when people announce that they'd prefer to pay for what they've had:

Pollycat wrote: »

We went out with the family, Mum, Dad, 3 daughters and partners.
The partner of one of my sister was incredibly mean with money.
He was the type to get to the bar last, and when it was his turn, he'd nurse the dregs of his drink and suggest we went home.

When the bill came, we were happy to split the bill, we'd pretty much had similar (although me and OH hadn't had puddings) and all shared the wine.
He however announced that he would pay for what they'd had.
He totted up what they'd had - but omitted to include the aperitifs, the Irish coffees and some other stuff.
I called him out on it and he actually had the good grace to look shame-faced.

Well, who'd have thought it!
His and my sister's share suddenly became more than the 4 way split.
He then decided that he would be happy to split the bill 4 ways but I told him he would pay for his and my sister's consumption and we'd split the remainder 3 ways.
He wasn't happy. :rotfl:

Or this scenario:

Pollycat wrote: »

We once as a group of 4 couples went for an 'all-you-can-eat' Chines buffet.
The way it works in this particular restaurant is that you can choose a number of dishes with rice/noodles and the idea is that you share your choice with anyone else who is interested in tasting it.

The waitress came and one chap said he liked spring rolls.
The waitress suggested a big platter of mixed starters - including spring rolls.
There were about 10 spring rolls and my OH and another friend took one of the spring rolls at which point we could hear whispers of 'they're eating your spring rolls'.
Well, not really as you can simply order more of whatever you want so nobody was missing out.

Various dishes attracted a premium e.g. steak instead of beef, king prawn instead of prawn.
The lettuce wrap course was also extra.

Towards the end of the main course, the waitress came round & asked if anyone wanted any more of anything.
My friend & I ordered aubergine - much to the clear disapproval of the first couple.
It didn't cost any extra - unlike the steak in black bean sauce, king prawn Kung Po and lettuce wrap course which they both had.

They were pretty huffy when it came to splitting the bill.
We've never been out with them for a meal since.

I posted the above 2 quotes on another similar thread over a year ago.
My opinion hasn't changed.

What does anyone think about this:
My friend went out with a crowd of female friends for a birthday meal.
All planned to have starters, mains & sweets so pretty much equal.
My friend wanted to have wine, nobody else did so she said she'd order a bottle for herself, pay for it herself and take home any that was left.
Other people had alcoholic drinks.
When the bill came, they said they'd split the bill (a usual agreement in the same circle of friends) minus the cost of the bottle of wine and my fried said she didn't think she should pay her share of the alcohol on the bill as she'd not had any of it and was paying £20 or so for her own wine.
Friends became huffy and clearly thought she was trying to rip them off.

boliston

SarahTG wrote: »

We always split the food bill but alcohol is shared between those who drank it. Fairest way. And this is by agreement. If someone says they are skint and has only ordered one course as a result, they only pay for that. But as we are friends, if someone is skint, we usually put together to treat them anyway. And no - I am not rich, probably due to believing in sharing with others who are my friends....

im not a heavy drinker (normally 2 drinks at most) but i know people who often order multiple drinks with a meal so there is no way i would pay for their habit

TBagpuss

svain wrote: »

I think it is churlish to question the bill. I assume you ate as well as the others and i assume you had soft drinks. Its my experience that people who worry less about this stuff enjoy the evening more. Nothing worse than itemising a bill at the end of the evening if there is a group ....

Having said that i have been out amongst a group that included a married couple that insisted on itemising the bill and then itemised it again between themselves and they paid to the penny their own individual amounts .... safe to say, they weren't invited that often afterwards

I think it depends. If everyone is eating and drinking roughly the same, or if you eat out regularly with the same group and take it in turns to be the designated driver, then I think that can be true, everyone can relax and enjoy themselves and you know that it all evens out over time.

However, it's hard to enjoy yourself if you feel you are being taken advantage of.

I don't think it is ever unreasonable for someone to decide that they only want to pay their own way. If others don't want to bother with keeping track or working out the numbers that's fine, they are free to split the balance of the bill between themselves.

I do think that if you don't want to split the bill it is generally reasonable to mention this at the start of the meal, and to then take responsibility for keeping track of your share.

If you are not happy with other people wanting to pay only for their own share then you are always free to offer to treat them.

My own personal experience has been that people who are strongly opposed to breaking down the bill and each person paying their own way tend to underestimate their own share, and will almost always end up paying more if the bill is split according to consumption.
Whether this is because they know, at some level, that splitting equally is working in their favour or whether it's just that higher alcohol consumption tends to lead to impaired memory and maths, I don't know.!

(that's not to say that anyone who prefer to split equally is taking advantage, just that those who are violently opposed to alternatives do mostly seem to be, whether by intent or not!)

I find that those who prefer to split the bill equally just because they find it a faff to work out, are normally happy to split by cost if someone else works out the figures, or to do a more equitable 'round figures' split - e.g. 'as you are n't drinking, stick £20 in and we'll split the rest'