The Labour Government

meltonblue said:
Well, yes, I’ve already said she should resign for it. To be clear, it’s a second home and only in stamp duty world, not in reality.

I’m not convinced it was as intentional as others though, given if she’d have waited a few months then what she did would have been perfectly fine. Seen she’s now said she sought advice from three separate parties too.
Click to expand...
Sought advice about what?
If three different parties said its fine to do what she did to avoid paying the stamp duty, she was still actively trying to save the stamp duty. Which is fine , we would all do it i guess.
But shes playing dumb on the fact that she just followed advice , when she knew full well that the result of the advice would be to save £40k.

Its an horrific error of judgement on her part. As i said, we would all do it, but as raynor is very vocal on what is seemingly right or wrong , she should (like all MPs) , be whiter than white.

Its a shame. I guess when it comes down to it, they just cant help themselves.

One more thing; i thought MPs had to have a home in their constituency? If the ashton home was no longer in her name then hows that work? And how do her constituents feel about it?
 
meltonblue said:
I do find it frustrating that for some that are overly party political, they’re calling for her resignation for doing far far less than others have done.

The truth should be that politicians of any persuasion have to be held to the highest standards and should all be treated similar. Hers for me is a resigning matter, as it should have been for all of them that don’t meet the standards of public life.
Click to expand...

Politics being political? Shudder at the thought!!! ;)

It damages Labour this of course their opponents are going to stick the knife in. You’re absolutely right about standards but politicians don’t tend to jump these days, they have to be pushed.
 
Ric said:
I think her position probably is untenable now, given her role. It’s a shame in a way, because she is one of the few authentic working class voices in the government but her previous vocal criticisms of Tory ministers leaves her wide open to accusations of hypocrisy. Not sure what she’s done is quite on a similar scale to others, but it’s felt like she’s been targeted by sections of the right-wing press for a while, so to fuck up like this is either very naive or stupid on her behalf.
Click to expand...
Leaks from her own party imo
 
meltonblue said:
No, that’s a stupid thought process which is why I said she’s either been badly advised or an idiot as that would only be true if she’d waited only a few months more.
Click to expand...
I must have missed it - what's this "waited a few months" argument?
 
Blue Maverick said:
If she got the wrong advice then how is it her fault? Surely the ones giving the advice are the ones at fault.
Click to expand...
Ask yourself this: if the Tories were still in power, and the Tory Deputy Prime Minister had just been caught doing this, would Angela Rayner be condemning their behaviour and demanding that they resign?

Or would she be saying "it's not their fault, they just got bad advice. We should let them off".
 
Chippy_boy said:
Why?

The thought process is hardly difficult or convoluted:

"Hmmm. If I buy this flat in Brighton, I'm looking at £70k in stamp duty. But if I leave the Ashton house to the kids in trust, then I get to still live there when up north and I get to save £40k because I won't have to pay the 2nd home premium. No brainer.

And wait a moment.. if I say it's worth £650k I won't have to pay IHT either. RESULT!"

"But hang on a minute... If the press get hold of this, I'll get slaughtered. So why don't I get a court order to stop the details being revealed. Perfect."
Click to expand...
Just on that £650k valuation, can anyone explain why it would just be accepted if it falls way below the real valuation? Would it not have to be independently verified?

The reason I’m asking is twofold. Firstly, I’m currently re-mortgaging my house to another lender and the valuation I put down still had to be confirmed by the bank’s own nominated valuer. In my case, it suits me that the higher the value of the house the better as it means the LTV is lower and I can get access to the best mortgage interest rates, unlike Rayner’s example where a lower valuation suits her. As it happens, they cane out to the house and agreed with my own valuation.

Secondly, when my dad passed away last year and we applied for Probate, I had to include the value of the house he owned with my stepmum. From memory, Zoopla had it down as being worth between £420k and £470k. I went with the higher £470k valuation as I didn’t fancy getting into trouble for putting too low a figure down. Maybe that was a bit naive on my part as they probably would’ve accepted anything in that Zoopla range. Funnily enough, when it became time to put it on the market all 3 estate agents valued it at between £375k and £400k tops so the Zoopla valuation was way out. In the end, it sold for £370k so I was £100k over on the valuation I put down for Probate. That extra £100k could’ve inadvertently led to some IHT being payable. Luckily it didn’t because the value of my dad’s and stepmum’s estates (she passed away a few months after my dad) still came to less than the IHT threshold - £1 million combined as both had left their share of the house to direct descendants - but being too generous with the valuation could’ve actually ended up with some tax wrongly being paid.

Obviously house valuations are subjective but as long as you don’t take the piss it shouldn’t be an issue. If Rayner’s house was worth £10k-£20k either side of that £650k, that’s neither here nor there but if - as I’ve read - it’s actually worth £800k then that’s some serious piss-taking on her part. I just don’t understand how that valuation flies through without it being independently verified, which is what happened in the examples I gave above.
 
Bluesince1979 said:
Sought advice about what?
If three different parties said its fine to do what she did to avoid paying the stamp duty, she was still actively trying to save the stamp duty. Which is fine , we would all do it i guess.
But shes playing dumb on the fact that she just followed advice , when she knew full well that the result of the advice would be to save £40k.

Its an horrific error of judgement on her part. As i said, we would all do it, but as raynor is very vocal on what is seemingly right or wrong , she should (like all MPs) , be whiter than white.

Its a shame. I guess when it comes down to it, they just cant help themselves.

One more thing; i thought MPs had to have a home in their constituency? If the ashton home was no longer in her name then hows that work? And how do her constituents feel about it?
Click to expand...

It’s still classed as her main home, she doesn’t own it anymore.
 
M18CTID said:
Just on that £650k valuation, can anyone explain why it would just be accepted if it falls way below the real valuation? Would it not have to be independently verified?

The reason I’m asking is twofold. Firstly, I’m currently re-mortgaging my house to another lender and the valuation I put down still had to be confirmed by the bank’s own nominated valuer. In my case, it suits me that the higher the value of the house the better as it means the LTV is lower and I can get access to the best mortgage interest rates, unlike Rayner’s example where a lower valuation suits her. As it happens, they cane out to the house and agreed with my own valuation.

Secondly, when my dad passed away last year and we applied for Probate, I had to include the value of the house he owned with my stepmum. From memory, Zoopla had it down as being worth between £420k and £470k. I went with the higher £470k valuation as I didn’t fancy getting into trouble for putting too low a figure down. Maybe that was a bit naive on my part as they probably would’ve accepted anything in that Zoopla range. Funnily enough, when it became time to put it on the market all 3 estate agents valued it at between £375k and £400k tops so the Zoopla valuation was way out. In the end, it sold for £370k so I was £100k over on the valuation I put down for Probate. That extra £100k could’ve inadvertently led to some IHT being payable. Luckily it didn’t because the value of my dad’s and stepmum’s estates (she passed away a few months after my dad) still came to less than the IHT threshold - £1 million combined as both had left their share of the house to direct descendants - but being too generous with the valuation could’ve actually ended up with some tax wrongly being paid.

Obviously house valuations are subjective but as long as you don’t take the piss it shouldn’t be an issue. If Rayner’s house was worth £10k-£20k either side of that £650k, that’s neither here nor there but if - as I’ve read - it’s actually worth £800k then that’s some serious piss-taking on her part. I just don’t understand how that valuation flies through without it being independently verified, which is what happened in the examples I gave above.
Click to expand...

The house she bought was worth 800k, not the house in Ashton.
 
meltonblue said:
As her child is 17, had she waited til he was 18 then she wouldn’t have had to pay the extra stamp duty.
Click to expand...
Thanks. However, she has 3 children and the 17 year old is the eldest. Do the other 2 not live in the same house? Genuine question, BTW.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Ask yourself this: if the Tories were still in power, and the Tory Deputy Prime Minister had just been caught doing this, would Angela Rayner be condemning their behaviour and demanding that they resign?

Or would she be saying "it's not their fault, they just got bad advice. We should let them off".
Click to expand...
True. 2 cheeks of the same arsehole. Then an even bigger **** will get in next time. Fantastic days
 
Chippy_boy said:
Thanks. However, she has 3 children and the 17 year old is the eldest. Do the other 2 not live in the same house? Genuine question, BTW.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure her oldest is in his twenties and has a child of his own. I assume the other two live at the house in Ashton.
 
M18CTID said:
Obviously house valuations are subjective but as long as you don’t take the piss it shouldn’t be an issue. If Rayner’s house was worth £10k-£20k either side of that £650k, that’s neither here nor there but if - as I’ve read - it’s actually worth £800k then that’s some serious piss-taking on her part. I just don’t understand how that valuation flies through without it being independently verified, which is what happened in the examples I gave above.
Click to expand...
I don't know but if you are not borrowing money against it, then I can well imagine the checks and balances when you are doing so, may not be required? You don't have to have your tax return checked or provide evidence when you file it, for example. You just put down the numbers. Perhaps its the same when you put a house in trust for your kids?
 
Chippy_boy said:
Ask yourself this: if the Tories were still in power, and the Tory Deputy Prime Minister had just been caught doing this, would Angela Rayner be condemning their behaviour and demanding that they resign?

Or would she be saying "it's not their fault, they just got bad advice. We should let them off".
Click to expand...
No I’d think Labour would do exactly the same my point is, if it’s proven to be bad advice from an expert then she’s not at fault same as if it’s a Tory.
 
Said it before majority of mp’s once they become an mp are in it to make as much money as they can and work the system to there advantage.. if your buying a house selling part of there other house as an mp you’d of thought they do everything correctly and double check it!? Especially with the media now and how they like a dog with a bone. What gets me with some mp’s is when they think they could lose there seat they move to a safer seat!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top