to think DLA should be spent on the child only?

[hotlinesling]

My 4 yo receives DLA and because it was backdated to when I applied I received £350 on Friday. I was planning to use it to buy her some things to make her a sensory area in her room. DH also got paid on Friday and usually transfers £350 'housekeeping' money to me as I'm a SAHM. However, he didn't transfer it and hasn't done so this morning either. I just got to the supermarket and called to ask why and he said I don't need it since I receive DLA now AIBU to think DLA is not for food or bills, but is for costs related to the person it's claimed for?

DP doesn't transfer money to me but says that all child benefit/child tax credits should be spent on DD. So I say that anything I have to take out of "her" money to buy food etc he then has to spend on her out of hos wages. So of your DH says you have to use your DLA for housekeeping then tell him he has to spend £350 on your daughter.

Just wanted to second what a PP said about not telling him if you do qualify for carer's allowance. If you can afford to, put it safely away in a savings account he knows nothing about in case you realise you do need to get out one day.
I'm all for financial openness with DH, but that's because we have a good relationship and he just isn't the type to cause difficulties or be unreasonable with money. 'D'F on the other hand... He used money to control DM (amongst other techniques), making her queue in his office reception to collect her housekeeping each week. Giving her pennies then demanding to know why she wasn't serving him steak every night. It's abuse. She saved what she was able and got out as soon as she could.
Of course YANBU. The DLA is for your DC's additional needs, not to bolster his beer fund.

DLA in our house pays the gas, food and electric etc as I cannot work....it goes in the pot. However, it also funds a carer once a month and extra bits like that.

Your partner is being very wrong....its for your daughter not your partner.

To be honest I was surprised to read he's actually your husband - I thought this was more the sort of thing ex husbands tried on, to reduce maintenance or whatever

In what universe does he think this is acceptable??

Why are you with him?

You need to have this out with him, you need a joint account you can access for all food and house hold stuff.

Yes, OP, if you're awarded Carer's (and you probably will be) keep it quiet.

Can I ask what your DH is actually for if he now has no intention of contributing towards the family's costs? Honestly, consider if you may actually be better off without him.

It depends on what he is planning to do with his remaining money. If he's planning on spending it on himself then he is being a dick, but if he is going to use it to save/spend on her then it's just a matter of where the money is.

I've not read the whole thread but what a dick
So he lives with you and gives you 350 a month?! Is that meant to buy stuff like food and pay bills?! What does he spend the rest of his wages on if that's his contribution?! Of course you are right it needs to be spent on your child not an excuse for him to be tight!

Of course YANBU

Is there any chance your DH meant that you don't need his £350 right now, as in today because you have the DLA £350 you could use for now and you could sort out what money was for what later? If not, then he is behaving terribly (and possibly even illegally??)

No aye like pp said it can be for regular food and the gas bill if the carer cannot work. This would be particularly relevant in a single parent family.

I don't agree with this though. Other, out of work/income support related, benefits should be enough to cover that. DLA should be specifically to enhance the life of or meet the needs of the disabled person. Any child in a single parent family needs the bills paid and food bought. And any family that needs that help should get it. If we start seeing DLA as money that can cover basic needs like that we'll end up in a position where the only way to be able to cope as an out of work or very low income family is to have a disabled child. Those with only NT children will be screwed. So I think it's a dangerous way to go.

So what's he doing with the money OP?

Ah, he's the DH who tells you he loves you constantly. How ironic.

Manic the problem with that scenario is take a child with asd for example who live in a house with a mortgage of £800. Both parents work, it becomes apparent that one parent needs to stop working to adequately meet the needs of their disabled child. They can't move to another cheaper area as it would been their dc has to move to a different special school. Therefore the dla could be used to pay for food and bills so the previous food and gas money can go towards the mortgage.

Or Manic imagine a single parent lived in an area with high rents, the housing benefit, if hours are reduced does not cover it. For the above reasons moving is not an option and bills still need to be paid.

" If we start seeing DLA as money that can cover basic needs like that we'll end up in a position where the only way to be able to cope as an out of work or very low income family is to have a disabled child. Those with only NT children will be screwed."

It doesn't really matter how we view it, there are already parents struggling to or not managing to pay for necessities - what should be a given, that parents should have enough money to provide shelter, food, clothing and basics like heating and electricity actually isn't always what does happen.

Horse riding lessons, sensory equipment, specialist IT equipment or anything along those lines won't do much to help a child when they're living in a home without an income that pays for basic necessities.

That's without even taking into account that those basic costs may well be higher because of a child's disability, or that families with a member who has a disability are more likely to have a low income because caring for that family member often isn't compatible with also working.

I've read your other threads. Your husband is a complete and utter twat. I never suggest LTB but you really should, otherwise you are enabling his shitty, selfish behaviour.

Manic the problem with that scenario is take a child with asd for example who live in a house with a mortgage of £800. Both parents work, it becomes apparent that one parent needs to stop working to adequately meet the needs of their disabled child. They can't move to another cheaper area as it would been their dc has to move to a different special school. Therefore the dla could be used to pay for food and bills so the previous food and gas money can go towards the mortgage.

Yes, but they'd have exactly the same problem if one person lost their job. Or if a child died and the parent experienced mental health problems and had to give up work.

There should be sufficient benefits to cover being out of work, whatever the reason. It shouldn't be in the remit of DLA to pay for those costs.

well then you're into means testing disability benefits.

Losing a job is tough but the solutions can be more flexible and the baseline costs of living less.

Moving, eating cheaply, selling things, down-sizing all MUCH harder if you have a child with disabilities who is dependent on things that locality, house-design, supermarket provisions, one particular parent to remain at home.

The truth is, as kids get older, DLA doesn't even come close to covering the additional costs associated with disability.

Manic you are missing the point , in the above senerio if the child was not disabled, they could move house to a cheaper area. Therefore regular benefits would cover day to day costs.

Manic - one of the things that DLA pays for in our house is me working fewer hours so I can be with DS as he can't cope with before/afterschool care (and most settings won't have him)

That's exactly what it should be for.

Oh it's this dickwad again, the one who refuses to see his daughter and is waiting for her to come to him and the one who purposely wakes you up and suffocates you with his controlling behaviour love.

Seriously this wankstain has no redeeming features. The more you post about him, the worse he is. He is an absolute tosser to take the money from his own child (I'm sure all your children are his).

I'm not sure if I've ever told anyone on here to LTB but it's something you should seriously consider. He is vile!

I don't know, personally I don't think I'm missing the point. Different opinions. But should agree to disagree as don't want to derail the thread. Sorry! As you were!

YANBU He sounds like a twat