to think that if absent parents got half the CB and CTC award...

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

...most main carers would never see a penny of it for the kids? Someone has been trying to convince me that, as an absent but responsible dad, he should be getting half of the CB and CTC on principle rather than all of it going to the main carer. He would then give his half back to his exW (main carer) apparently.

AIBU to think that's a really lousy & rather controlling idea?

[Kayano]

it is the worst idea ever. Why would a non carer need it anyway?

[TheBigJessie]

It does sound incredibly controlling that he would like to do that. I guess that's why he's an ex.

[GypsyMoth]

so he'd give back his half of the benefits...yes,and his maintenence AS WELL????

[EricNorthmansMistressOfPotions]

YANBU
ridiculous idea and would never happen. And yes, very controlling.

[Sarsaparilllla]

What would be the point if he was going to give it back anyway

What a pointless idea!!

[GypsyMoth]

i'm guessing he would then keep most of it back to cover costs of contact weekends with the dc,access,things he buys them when out and about?

but doesnt mention that bit to you just yet....

[DesperatelySeekingSedatives]

Like others said, very controlling, like absent parents who only pay maintence if they apprrove of what their ex partner spends it on.

This person sounds likes a prat.

[AMumInScotland]

So, someone who doesn't have children living with them should get it "on principle" On what principle exactly?

Given how much of a struggle wome parents have getting any maintenance out of the absent parent, I hardly think that would be a good plan. Many would not give it back, many would use it as a way of controlling their ex.

I'm sure there are also many who would hand it over cheerfully without any problem - but if they are just going to hand it over anyway, what would be the point in going from A to B to C instead of A to C direct?

He sounds like a right arse to me!

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

It is a thread about another thread on the 'Money' board. I think 'right arse' covers it extremely accurately. He also links to various campaigning-style sites... one being FFJ... so I have deep suspicions about motives! He claims to have the children to stay for two or three nights a week (I think it was) and therefore should get half the CB - to give back again. It sounded utterly daft but I was starting to doubt my own judgement.

[GypsyMoth]

so does he pay maintenence to the pwc?

[TheBigJessie]

Even if he did give it straight back to the household that actually had the children in it, I expect he'd like the power, and the unspoken possibility that next month he might with-hold it. I'm sure of it.

[ENormaSnob]

Stupid idea.

[Boshankles]

How can he be absent and responsible.

Absent implies not around at all.

[Andrewofgg]

This is someone taking the piss. Obvious bollocks.

[SomethingProfound]

he sound like a pillock!............... wonders off to find this thread!

[Sapphirefling]

Awwww - I think it's a lovely idea

Ex is currently on holiday abroad with his bit on the side. A few extra quid would buy him a luxury spa treatment for her or something. How very sweet - when do you think it will become law ? Shall I set up a direct debit to him now?
Now I'll just get back to meal planning and wondering where the money for new school shoes is going to come from......

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

No maintenance is specifically mentioned. He claims to be on a low income & plunging himself into debt/poverty by paying 50% of other costs like school clothes, trips and 'medical' (in Britain?). Linking here

[Truckrelented]

We split the child-benefit 50-50. And the children's costs 50-50.

I would have thought both parents would have to earn similar amounts to do this though.

[KilledBill]

Yet another fuckwitt linked to FFJ - so whats new?

Tell him that "on principal" he should happily allow as much money as possible to go to his ex and the children to ensure they get the best start and dont go without.

[PGTip]

Don't agree with this entirely, however in my db case if this is what happened his exw would want the money (which he would happily give btw), so might mean he had a chance if seeing his dc again.

[PiousPrat]

I could kind of see the point if he was proposing a proportional split, such as PWC has the child 5 nights a week so gets 5/7s of the CB and the weekend parent gets 2/7 so each get an amount (theoretically) reflecting their outgoings. But he isn't, so he is a knob.

In practice it would be a hideous idea anyway. Quite aside from the fact that it would be a nightmare to try and set up a system to deal with making payments, child care arrangements tend to fluctuate over the year. Does he think that if he takes the DC away on holiday that he should get the PWC's share for that week as well, leaving them with the ongoing costs of upkeep on a house that is larger than the parent would need on their own, by virtue of being stuffed full of kids crap? Would he expect a government department to be capable of processing that claim for a temporary change of circumstances without cocking it up or it costing a fortune in paperwork and staffing?