When it comes to eating out at cafes or restaurants, splitting the bill is a touchy topic for many.
While some people agree that sharing the cost and splitting the bill evenly is the easiest and fairest way to go, others leave a meal unimpressed that they’ve been forced to cover the cost of food and drinks they haven’t consumed. Some prefer to simply pay for the food and drinks they order and leave it at that.
What’s worse is when someone is watching their waist and wallet and agrees to split the bill, only to find someone else at the table has ordered several fancy drinks and splashed out on starters and desserts.
Now, a grandmother has sparked the debate on the issue by sharing her experience with a bill-splitting debacle. Taking to grandparenting forum Gransnet, she explained she was royally peeved off after he son-in-law ordered a £9 (AU$16, US$11) plate of pasta for her grandbaby, knowing full well the 18-month-old wouldn’t eat it, then expected her and her husband to foot the bill.
She described it as a “complete waste of money” and asked others in the forum what they thought of the situation. Of course, people had plenty to say.
One person understood that babies have a mind of their own when it comes to mealtime.
They wrote: “My dd [dear daughter] ordered scrambled eggs on toast for her 9mo baby recently. The baby polished off the lot and ate some of our meal, too! It’s sometimes hard to tell whether or not children will eat when you go out. I agree that waste is annoying but assuming this isn’t a regular event, I wouldn’t think any more about it.”
Another said they wouldn’t have ordered a full meal for a small child in the first place.
“As a mum I would have asked for a second plate and given the toddler some of my meal,” she wrote. “But let it go and don’t waste time and enjoy feeling annoyed.”
A third comment pointed the finger at the child: “Same baby probably usually eats NOTHING but pasta, and chows down whole bowls at a time. They do it on purpose to embarrass mum and dad I swear.”