The Labour Government

Ifwecouldjust....... said:
Tories must be digging into her affairs very deeply to uncover this (and it was the letting agents fault) Shame they dont pay as much attention when their mates do it.
Click to expand...
According to the DM reporter, it was leaked to her about the lack of licence. An item on the radio just now from a landlord in the same area says the regulations are pretty complex and the council effectively has no way to monitor the status of properties. They rely on landlords coming forward when circumstances change and only take action if the council finds out first that an offence has been committed, and even then they have rarely if ever fined anyone.
 
Rental agent has apologised for not applying for licence and for misleading the Chancellor. Don’t they know that BKB and its still her fault and should be sacked.
 
west didsblue said:
Rental agent has apologised for not applying for licence and for misleading the Chancellor. Don’t they know that BKB and its still her fault and should be sacked.
Click to expand...

Reeves 'would have been under the impression that a licence had been applied for' - estate agentpublished at 17:34
17:34Breaking​

We've just heard for the first time from the letting agency which oversaw the renting out of Rachel Reeves' former family home.

They were previously declining to comment but Gareth Martin, owner of Harvey Wheeler, has now released a statement - here it is in full:

"We alert all our clients to the need for a licence. In an effort to be helpful our previous property manager offered to apply for a licence on these clients' behalf, as shown in the correspondence.

"That property manager suddenly resigned on the Friday before the tenancy began on the following Monday.

"Unfortunately, the lack of application was not picked up by us as we do not normally apply for licences on behalf of our clients; the onus is on them to apply.

"We have apologised to the owners for this oversight.

"At the time the tenancy began, all the relevant certificates were in place and if the licence had been applied for, we have no doubt it would have been granted.

"Our clients would have been under the impression that a licence had been applied for. Although it is not our responsibility to apply, we did offer to help with this.

"We deeply regret the issue caused to our clients as they would have been under the impression that a licence had been applied for."
 
Brewster's millions said:
I’m just interested on your opinion on the matter, because you appear to hold strong views on how much money people should have, as well as unearned income and the ‘idle rich’. Or did yesterday in any case, before this story broke.

If the rental income covers her mortgage on the property, and given the other properties that she has available to her for free, then surely a good compromise would be to cap her other income at say £40k a year.

I mean, how does anyone with no housing costs need an income of £40k?
Click to expand...
It's bad enough another poster making stuff up about my views without your making more stuff up based on his made-up stuff.

I'll give you some a bonus point if you know what Southwark mean in their determination order by "Paragraph 5(f): Exempted tenancies or licences, Selective Licensing of Houses (Specified Exemptions) (England) Order 2006".
 
hilts said:
If it wears a red rosette its kind of like a free pass, think of it as diplomatic immunity in your own country.
Click to expand...
And here's someone else making stuff up based on made-up stuff based on made-up stuff.
 
west didsblue said:
Rental agent has apologised for not applying for licence and for misleading the Chancellor. Don’t they know that BKB and its still her fault and should be sacked.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t actually make any odds.

Being under the impression that your legal requirement has been fulfilled isn’t the same as knowing that it has and actually fulfilling your legal requirements.

It was her responsibility to secure the license and she didn’t do it. As she herself has admitted.
 
Wait a minute, so they didn't know they had to apply for a licence but now they have just remembered the husband had an email saying the estate agent would sort it? Erm wouldn't that mean they did know?
 
Gaz76 said:
Wait a minute, so they didn't know they had to apply for a licence but now they have just remembered the husband had an email saying the estate agent would sort it? Erm wouldn't that mean they did know?
Click to expand...
They didn’t know they had to apply because the agent was going to on their behalf. Not too difficult to understand
 
Gaz76 said:
Wait a minute, so they didn't know they had to apply for a licence but now they have just remembered the husband had an email saying the estate agent would sort it? Erm wouldn't that mean they did know?
Click to expand...
It means that her story has changed completely from what she said in her letter last night.

Last night, she said that ‘Regrettably, we were not aware that a licence was necessary, and so we did not obtain the licence before letting the property out’.

Now she’s saying that they were in fact told a license was required, and that that they were under the impression that this had been done for them.

It’s quite the difference isn’t it? It’s good to see that her customary attention to detail has been deployed to full effect here!
 
It’s all good and well rolling out a statement from another party absolving you and saying they made the mistake but it’s still an issue when it completely blows your own statement made just 24 hours earlier.
 
blueinsa said:
It’s all good and well rolling out a statement from another party absolving you and saying they made the mistake but it’s still an issue when it completely blows your own statement made just 24 hours earlier.
Click to expand...
Just makes her look even more incompetent.

Sending an official letter to the PM and the ethics advisor based on an entirely false version of events, and then having to do a complete 180 on it not even 24 hours later.

Really, really poor.
 
mosssideblue said:
8.5 years
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
mosssideblue said:
Who else is there?
Click to expand...
We’re in weird times. Super-majorities can swing, so there should be no complacency.

At the moment, only Reform seem to be up for the challenge, but they have a ceiling, so as long as this government don’t do utterly crazy things and start making people feel better off by 2029, you are probably right.

A competent Tory that wants to unite the country may appear too. Unlikely, but technically possible.
 
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