|
settle an argument for me (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| spitty |
| quote: | Originally posted by Mortyman
If you care about your friendship ... split 3 ways equally.
Going on the rationality of 60% & 40%... 1 person paying $600 while the other 2 pay $450... how is that fair? So what if 2 people have to pay $50 more each? Otherwise the best friend now has to pay $150 more than the couple!
It sounds like someone is looking out for the best interest of themselves and their boyfriend... and not their best friend! This is how friendships end... trust me... been there, done that! Not a good scene!!! :( |
except for the fact that me and my boyfriend can't get each our own room even if we wanted to.
Iniatially i wanted a 3bdrm so i could have a study. she suggested the 2brdm in the first place, b/c she couldn't afford the costs of a 3bdrm. now him and i have to split a room, not b/c we want to, but because we're ALL trying to save money. so why should we have to pay the same amount if we are the ones getting shafted. you have to realise that going from a 3 bdrm to a 2bdrm wasn't MINE and TONES choices. it was lauras idea and ALL of ours choice. |
|
|
| Vivid Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by spitty
except for the fact that me and my boyfriend can't get each our own room even if we wanted to.
Iniatially i wanted a 3bdrm so i could have a study. she suggested the 2brdm in the first place, b/c she couldn't afford the costs of a 3bdrm. now him and i have to split a room, not b/c we want to, but because we're ALL trying to save money. so why should we have to pay the same amount if we are the ones getting shafted. you have to realise that going from a 3 bdrm to a 2bdrm wasn't MINE and TONES choices. it was lauras idea and ALL of ours choice. |
yo wait up wait up. which laura is this? ur best friend laura the one i thought was in smokin hot laura?
kick her out she can come sleep with me |
|
|
| MissK |
| quote: | Originally posted by spitty
you have to realise that going from a 3 bdrm to a 2bdrm wasn't MINE and TONES choices. it was lauras idea and ALL of ours choice. |
Only if you feel a ed over by her idea should you split 60/40.
If this idea works in your favor and you reep the benefits as well than it should stick @ 3 split. It's only fair, especially as friends.
and LOOOOOOOOOOOOL @ Josh |
|
|
| Mortyman |
| quote: | Originally posted by spitty
except for the fact that me and my boyfriend can't get each our own room even if we wanted to.
Iniatially i wanted a 3bdrm so i could have a study. she suggested the 2brdm in the first place, b/c she couldn't afford the costs of a 3bdrm. now him and i have to split a room, not b/c we want to, but because we're ALL trying to save money. so why should we have to pay the same amount if we are the ones getting shafted. you have to realise that going from a 3 bdrm to a 2bdrm wasn't MINE and TONES choices. it was lauras idea and ALL of ours choice. |
So you really aren't getting shafted if you knew you were going to share a bedroom with your boyfriend in the first place.
Well, if it's her idea but you all chose to go along with it, then it's everybody's decision that this is best, therefore should still be split 3 ways equally. If you want to get a 3 bedroom just so the 3rd bedroom is used as a study, then it's not really fair for anyone else to pay for your study area. You're only getting shafted out of a study area. Like I said before... it's only $50 more for you and your bf... make a deal with her that her responsibility is to keep the washroom clean or some crap like that. Moral Obligation should outweigh a Financial Burden. |
|
|
| StereoPrincess |
I still very much stand by my opinion about splitting everything equally. The only way it would work is if the person that pays more actually suggested it themselves and you knew that it wouldn't put them under any financial stress.
When you are an adult you have to learn to live within a budget. If you cannot afford a place then you can't live there. Plain and simple. If someone can't afford the same as you, then they can't really be your roomate. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by StereoPrincess
When you are an adult you have to learn to live within a budget. If you cannot afford a place then you can't live there. |
Thank you.
The fact that you originally wanted a larger space but had to "size down" due to financial constraints does not work in your favour here; you had a standing arrangement to split the cost 3 ways and (from what I understand) you no longer want to honour that. That's your call to make, but you have no right to try to coerce the 3rd person into paying more than they originally agreed to pay. You may have a reason for changing your mind, but not only is that reason subjective, it's irrelevant to the present situation.
If you and your boyfriend are sure that you can still afford a 3-bedroom but she cannot, then Margaret's quite correct, you may need to find another roommate. What's relevant is not anyone's individual income, but the total sum to be split and the original arrangement to split it. |
|
|
| ChrisD |
| quote: | Originally posted by Tordan
yeah that's a tough one. you'd think it would be 50-50 since it's a 2 bedroom. the 60-40 split seems like a good compromise. but what if the other girl has her bf move it with her? |
I would go with this, tough call though.
Thankgod for no roomates anymore - best of luck! |
|
|
| Stilez |
| quote: | Originally posted by StereoPrincess
lol. the only way to do it is equally 3 ways.
why would the person staying alone pay more? that's just silly. you share the other areas equally. kitchen, living room, bathroom.
just because they get their own room doesn't mean they pay more. you choose to live in the same room as boyfriend and actually it's a bonus that you have a boyfriend there. |
I guess you're looking at it on an individual (per person) perspective. I was looking at it as the couple counting as 1 and the roomate as 1. Since the couple has double the income coming in, but also use up double the utilities, food, etc.. I think the couple should pay more 'collectively' but not necessarily individually.
This is why I still believe the 60/40 solution is best. 60% for the couple since there's 2 of them and they should be paying more as a whole (but not necessarily individually), and 40% for the single roommate. When you break it down per person, the single roommate could complain that she's paying more 'individually' than the couple, but if she sees the bigger picture, she'll see that they're still covering more of the costs since they're paying more as a couple.
Now, if the roommate gets a bf and he moves in... well naturally he's gonna have to start paying. At which point, everything now becomes 50/50 for all parties [individually]. |
|
|
| TFT-Productions |
Starting with utilities its the easiest: Split it in 3 ways. So 100 each.
Next easy one would be the living space. The bedrooms are personal space so only the person / couple would be in them. The rest is shared.
So 1500 with I am assuming 5 rooms total (2 bedrooms, kitchen, living room, bathroom).
divide 1500 by 5 rooms which equals 300 / room.
so 300 per bedroom per party
the other 3 rooms which is another 900 should be split 3 ways as shared living space.
So another 300 each.
The breakdown is as follows:
Single person: $700
Couple per person: $550 each
I think this is the fairest! |
|
|
| mikester69 |
| Why not just rent an apartment with a master bedroom and a smaller one then split it 3 ways...problem solved. |
|
|
| kaniz |
After reading spittys comments in this thread:
do not move into this situatioon
If this choice is causing so much drama, just think of what will come up when
- The hydro/util bill comes in
- The cable bill - "But, I'm at school all day, and doing homework at night - I hardly watch any TV, why should I pay the same ammount?"
- When wondering "who used the last roll of toilet paper, and who is buying the next batch?"
- When someone drinks the last of the milk
Then /every/ time someone in the house has a disagreement, the fact that someone is paying a bit more rent than the next person is going to result in a "well, I'm paying more than you!" card, but then you and your partner will be all "Well, combined we are paying more than you!"
drama /will/ happen. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Stilez
Since the couple has double the income coming in, but also use up double the utilities, food, etc.. I think the couple should pay more 'collectively' but not necessarily individually. |
Your logic doesn't line up with your math. If the couple consumes double, then the correct split is 33/66 (which in the end is a 3-way split). 40 times 2 is 80, not 60. |
|
|
|
|
