Money Moral Dilemma: How much should I pay towards the holiday home I've rented with two couples?

Jemma01

bionic72 said:

Having been in this situation for 33years, I find it hard to believe that it can still be an issue. Presumably all 5 people work? and therefore each have a salary (regardless of the amount). As individuals sharing the house and all its facilities, the costs should be shared 5 ways. It is always easier dealing with these things before embarking on shared events. As a singleton for many years, I always pay my way and equally expect others to do the same. I adopt the same equality when out with friends for meals, drinks etc. Best not to complicate things.

Them working or not is irrelevant in all circumstances. It suggests if one is a dependent, then we should all share the cost!! If one can't afford it, they should find something they can afford, or travel with people that align to their budget.

BdetteNoDebt

NO NO NO it absolutely cannot be fair to split it 3 ways. 

5 guests, so you split it 5 ways. Per head, not per room.
I have seen couples trying to get away with this kind of logic many times. It's just not fair. 

IvonH

You may be using slightly less water, but you are using a room and all the facilities.
Think about the bigger picture: value the fact that people want to spend their free time with you and try to enjoy their company in this knowledge.
A single friend can upset the balance in a group and you are lucky to have friends you can spend time with.

Pollycat

IvonH said:

You may be using slightly less water, but you are using a room and all the facilities.
Think about the bigger picture: value the fact that people want to spend their free time with you and try to enjoy their company in this knowledge.
A single friend can upset the balance in a group and you are lucky to have friends you can spend time with.

Or 4 people want you to pay twice as much as they do per person...
How is that 'lucky'?

Jemma01

IvonH said:

You may be using slightly less water, but you are using a room and all the facilities.
Think about the bigger picture: value the fact that people want to spend their free time with you and try to enjoy their company in this knowledge.
A single friend can upset the balance in a group and you are lucky to have friends you can spend time with.

Excuse me!? Upset what balance? What a load of rubbish.

Angelica123

I guess this is a dilemma that has genuinely brought up a lot of debate (which I guess makes a change). I am surprised that so many people think a split by 3 is reasonable. I think it's slightly different if you were staying in a hotel where you are paying exclusively for room (where I think it is fair to expect people to pay for whatever room they book). This is a house you are sharing with communal spaces where you will be spending a lot of your time, part of the money is going towards bills. It's also unlikely that the single person will get the best room with the ensuite. It's also unlikely that the group would be happy with the single person bringing a randomer just to save cost. I also think that as the single person travelling with couples, already has to deal with that sense that by single they are expected to be the most flexible, go with flow of the majority. 

If you breakdown the AirBNB fee into bedroom cost/communal area cost/bills cost/cleaning fee cost - it becomes clear that dividing by 3, the single person overpays for all communal aspects. 

I personally think that dividing by the number of adults is the fairest so five in this case. On a similar note, if after booking the accomodation, someone decides they can't come for the full time. Then I think it's still reasonable to expect to pay for the whole time as the booking was made on that presumption. It definitely should have been agreed before booking. Ultimately, these things should have been ironed out before booking but I can see how it's easy to assume everyone thinks the same way re how things should be divided. Until I saw this thread, it would never occur to me that anyone would consider anything other than divide by 5 reasonable. 

Suzycoll

MSE_Kelvin said:

This week's MoneySaver who wants advice asks...

We've rented a house that has three double bedrooms, with the couples taking a room each, and me taking the third. The couple that booked it have suggested we split the cost three ways as there are three bedrooms, which means me paying a third of the total, and the others a sixth each. Surely a five-way split would be fairer? The house includes other rooms and amenities, which we'll all use.

Unfortunately the MSE team can't answer Money Moral Dilemma questions as contributions are emailed in or suggested in person. They are intended to be a point of debate and discussed at face value. Remember that behind each dilemma there is a real person so, as the forum rules say, please keep it kind and keep it clean.

If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.
Got a Money Moral Dilemma of your own? Suggest an MMD.
View past Money Moral Dilemmas.

I think (begrudgingly) a 3 way split is the only way to split it as there are 3 bedrooms. 

As usual single people using hotels holidays etc end up paying WAY MORE than couples & it's wrong 😭

Soupdragon01

Speaking as a single person.  You are paying for the use of a bedroom, split it 3 ways or bring a friend to share the cost of your room.

Daywon

I'd go for sharing cost by 5, otherwise where's the point in sharing with 2 couples - you'd be just as well paying single supplement in a hotel and have the advantage of total privacy.  

kinger101

Offer to sleep in the same bed as one of the couples.  That way the three of you would pay 16.67% each and the other couple 25%.