Outraged wedding guest receives a BILL from the bride's parents after her son, 16, ate an adult meal instead of a child's portion at the reception

A wedding guest has been left outraged after receiving a bill from the bride's parents, because her son, 16, at an adult meal instead of a child's.  

The unnamed mother, believed to be from the US, took to Reddit to vent her frustrations, revealing that she'd requested adult meals for both herself and her son when she sent her RSVP. 

On the day, her son was offered a child's portion of chicken and fries, but he assumed it was a mistake and requested an adult meal. 

She later received a call from the bride's parents, asking her to pay up, because the caterers had charged them for an extra adult meal.  

Reddit users quickly supported the unnamed woman, with one branding the bride's parents 'grossly tacky'. 

Explaining the situation, the mother said that there was an option to select a 'kid's meal version of each dish', when replying to the wedding invite. 

'I never considered ordering one for my son because he is too old for kids' meals,' she said.

'I sent in the RSVP card with our meal selections and never heard anything about it.

'At the wedding, my son and I got our food, but the table was one chicken meal short'.

'The waiter had a small plate of chicken fingers and fries, but everyone at the table told him it must be a mistake because we didn't have any kids sitting with us.

The waiters were able to put together an extra chicken plate for the person who didn't get one, and it seemed all was well.'

But after the big day, the mother received a call from the bride's parents, who were picking up the bill.

'They told me that the chicken fingers had been for my son, and that I had caused the caterer to charge them for the extra adult chicken meal,' she explained.

'I told them my son had asked for the adult meal, but they said he should have had the kid's meal because he's under 18.

They said I should have known he was meant to have a kid's meal and that I should have asked for clarification if I wasn't sure.'

She explained that she never thought it would be possible for her son to get a kid's meal, as the cut-off is usually 13.

The disgruntled guest also added she thought it was rude to assume a 16-year-old would eat the smaller meal. 

'10 and under I would think would have kids' meals. and 11 to 13 is questionable, but 14 and up I would never think would have a kid's meal.

The bride's parents told me it's normal for anyone under 18 to get a kid's meal, but I've never heard of 18 being the cut-off.

'I think it's rude to feed a 16-year-old a meal meant for a six-year-old.

'I know wedding meals are expensive, but I think this was their mistake.'

She received a flood of support from commenters on Reddit, including one who said: 'The fact that someone planning the reception even thought a teenage boy should get a child's meal is ludicrous and stupid. 

'The fact that the bride's parents now want you to pay for it is grossly tacky. Are you close to these people? Do you care what they think? 

'If not then respond point blank that they are out of line and no you aren't going to reimburse them for a mistake of their own making' one wrote.

Another commented: 'Expected to eat a kids meal = rude ... calling later to ask for $ because you choose to change a guest’s meal and you have to pay for it... unbelievable'.

While others suggested compromise of paying the difference between a kid's and adult meal.    

'I'd be tempted to pay them the difference between a child's meal and an adult's meal and then shame them to kingdom come at every opportunity that presents itself' one wrote.

Others lamented the fact that teenage boys tend to eat more than adults, adding that it's ridiculous to expect them to eat a meal designed for an infant.

'Whoever "caught" the mistake and changed the adult meal to a kids meal should have said something to the guest. As far as I am concerned if you are giving people options they can choose what they want, there should be no age limit. 

'Parents aren't going to order the steak for their 4-year-old who barely eats and hates steak. 

The RSVP card should have said (under 18) next to or underneath the kid's meal option. If there are "rules" about what constitutes a kid, that should have been spelled out clearly on the invitation. This is their fault for not clarifying in the first place. 

Other Reddit users agreed the RSVP card should have said 'under 18' next to the children's option.

stella Posted on September 23, 2019 18:45

  • 0 Paxex
  • 0
  • 151
  • 0