There is a legal principle that contractual benefits can be assigned, but not contractual obligations.
But it doesn't work like this. It works on a much simpler basis - e.g. if I'm a landlord and receive rental income and I assign that income to a third party, the third party does not automatically become responsible for fixing the roof.
It does not mean that I can assign the income to a third party and all responsibilities for the upkeep of the property are magically wiped out, and everyone involved - except the tenant - can use this as an excuse for a party.
How does bankruptcy for corporations work? If that were true wouldn't companies just liquidate, payout to the founders, and screw over investors? But in reality don't courts require the debtors to be paid off first?
But it doesn't work like this. It works on a much simpler basis - e.g. if I'm a landlord and receive rental income and I assign that income to a third party, the third party does not automatically become responsible for fixing the roof.
It does not mean that I can assign the income to a third party and all responsibilities for the upkeep of the property are magically wiped out, and everyone involved - except the tenant - can use this as an excuse for a party.