When Hannah*, a freelancer struggling to survive in London, arrived at her friend’s impromptu birthday dinner late thanks to Tube strikes, the six other (more local) guests had already ordered a myriad of sharing small plates without her. From the ravished spread, she managed to mop up two bites of food and a negroni; then everyone decided to split the bill. “My friend said, ‘You’ve hardly eaten anything,’ but I felt really awkward,” she says. “I probably lost like £20, but it just didn’t feel appropriate to push back at a one-off birthday party.”
Unequal bill splitting is a costly courtesy – and far from a one-off. In fact, one in three Brits regularly overpay on shared bills like Hannah’s to avoid awkward money conversations with their fellow diners. Each year, this so-called “politeness penalty” totals £240 on average, according to new research by Zopa Bank. Notably, young people like Hannah are most likely to foot an unfair share of the bill, with 44 per cent of 25- to 34-year-olds saying they often end up paying for far more than they’ve ordered. “It just feels quite tight,” Hannah says of the idea of flagging the issue with the table in an attempt to save some of her hard-earned cash.
In Britain, we’re bad at talking about money, which is why most of us will nod politely when someone asks to split the bill while silently seething about the extra four cocktails they ordered. That, or there’s always the option of competitive eating, where you say you’ll have a starter, side dish and pudding in line with the most extravagant eater at your table in an attempt to make things equal. You’ll be covering the cost anyway, so you may as well make it worth your while. Of course, when it comes to the mounting total, everyone is a loser.
With a global recession looming, our repression may need a rethink. Currently, we’re more comfortable speaking about our politics, relationships and mental health than money. But, as Rachel points out to Ross in Friends after she, Phoebe and Joey struggle to pay for Monica’s promotion dinner at a fancy restaurant, the people who don’t think or talk about money are the ones who have it – and right now, many of us don’t.
Often, the awkwardness of fairly splitting a bill stems from the admin; nobody wants to whip out their phone calculator at the table and start doing sums. Inevitably, someone will forget to add the service, causing the waiter to peel back over and tell your table you’re £6 short. It’s a lengthy, excruciating, and unglamorous process – one that isn’t actually global. In Denmark, for example, it’s usual to go up to the counter and pay for what you had, or the server will itemise your own total for you, making the split both assuringly accurate and seamless.
Until the UK catches up, Rupert Wesson, director of etiquette advisory company Debrett’s, says it’s far from a faux pas to make sure you’re not being shafted. “You could take the view that what goes around comes around and that it all balances itself out in the end. However, you should never feel obliged to do so,” he says. “Being fair and equitable is unlikely to be the wrong thing to do, even if it might seem a little inelegant at the time. If people want to break the bill down item by item, then that is their right. It is wrong to assume we know enough about everyone’s finances to assume they can subsidise the dining habits of everyone at the table.”
Some apps have attempted to lessen the laboriousness of dividing the check. Tools like Splitwise or banks like Monzo and Zopa have options to digitally divide a bill among a group after the fact – but the mental gymnastics doesn’t stop there for the person who fronted the cost initially. In the last month alone, just over a third of those surveyed said that they’d had to chase their friends and family for money they were owed, with some nudging as many as five times before the repayment eventually landed in their account.
This is not to say, of course, that nobody should ever front the cost of someone else’s cocktail, coffee or cinema ticket. Even when money is tight, kindness has benefits, too. One recent study by researchers at the University of Queensland found that despite the dent in your bank account, covering the cost of a friend’s experience can actually make you happier.
Although it does depend on who you’re with. In the study, participants experienced a boost in mood if they were paying for their best friend – but not if it was just an acquaintance.
Here, the difference was due to differing repayment expectations. With friends, the cinema ticket participants purchased was perceived as a gift; they wanted to cover their friend’s night out because they cared about them. With acquaintances, people had higher expectations of repayment and noted they would be less happy to stump up the cash for them.
But, ironically, it’s often acquaintances – more than close friends – that we wind up paying for one way or another. “It makes it quite awkward to make demands of people you’ve just met that evening,” says Hannah. “If you know them well, it’s not the same. I’m hesitant to push for something unless it’s a really close friend or a flatmate, because we live together.”
Awkward conversations are undeniably easier to have with people close to us. But, surely, there’s an argument for turning this ethos on its head? If you save money by not bolstering the bill for people you’re unbothered by, you have more money to save or spend on those you love, which makes you feel good in return. A win for your wallet, or your wellbeing.
Because we’re worried about money; not just how much we have but how it’ll impact our friendships, too. More than one in five adults (22 per cent) admit to feeling uncomfortable when friends propose activities beyond their comfortable spending limit, while nearly a quarter (24 per cent) fear upsetting someone who may be struggling financially, 16 per cent worry about being judged for their own financial situation, and 11 per cent are concerned about appearing “cheap” if they admit to budget constraints. That’s a lot of anxiety.
To avoid leaving a bad taste in anyone’s mouth, Wesson suggests transparency before plates hit the table, rather than when they’re cleared, so you avoid getting shuffled into subbing someone else’s filet mignon and champagne, while you’ve had tap water and a salad. On the big dinner debate, he concludes: “It’s always best to try and establish, at least in general terms, how things are being done before everyone gets stuck in.”