But I have to add here, TPW, that we have no idea how Carla's behavior has been with money!
Imagine the scenario. Woman and dp between them have 1200 per month. Woman turns around one day and says "You may have £40 per week, and £20 of that must go to your mother to pay off an old debt to her. The rest is yours. If you get into debt, I will not pay for you. Oh, and I'm not going to give you the slightest clue of what we do have."
The woman looks like a tyrant, a harridan!
But what you don't know is the 3 years history behind the capping.
What you haven't seen is the bailiffs turning up, because the bills have not been paid. Why? The man usually pays them, and he put the money in fruit machines instead.
Or, DD's bouncing, 3 times a month, costing £100 (nearly 10% of the entire income!) in bank charges, because the man withdrew every penny in the account. To put in fruit machines.
The housing officer turning up on the door, demanding to know why the rent hadn't been paid for 8 weeks. You didn't see that either.
They have seperate bank accounts, but the woman is left to find money for food, clothes, holidays, a new tumble dryer, furniture, an impending baby, shoes for toddler. She has an income half his, outgoings twice his, they are his children, but he doesn't contribute, simply because he has spent it all on what he wants.
Would you then blame that woman for capping the expenditure?
What I am saying is, if Carla's husband has been treated like this for the past three years, can we then condemn him for demanding an end to it? His income may be very high, he may be acting unfairly, but then again his income may be quite low. He may have been struggling to keep up with someone who spends money like water.