Angela Rayner to face investigation?

[Rusty Old-Banger]

Seasonal Hero said:

i4got said:

Do people not even try to disguise ad hominems any more?

Not an ad-hom when it's a fact.

Staines has four alcohol-related convictions [1] In 2002, Staines was banned from driving for 12 months for drink driving.[53] When he was convicted of the same offence six years later, he was asked in court by District Judge Timothy Stone whether he had an alcohol problem and replied: "Possibly." He was banned from driving for three years, as well as being given an 18-month supervision order and wearing an electronic tag for three months.[54][53]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Staines#Crimina...

HTH.

O/T but a tag for drink driving is crazy.

[QuickQuack]

cheesejunkie said:

Seasonal Hero said:

cheesejunkie said:

I like reading things I disagree with. I used to read some of Guido's stuff in a know your enemy type way. I don't agree with his politics at all.

But attacking a man who has a problem bothers me. To be fair he attacks plenty and there's a bit of live by the sword die by the sword where I'm not exactly full of sympathy. But I'd not attack him for that when there are so many other reasons disagree with him.

I’d agree. If I thought he gave the slightest st about anyone else. But he doesn’t. He is the epitome of someone who will attack anyone for anything if it serves his purpose.

And I say that as someone who had an alcoholic for a father.

He's a nasty piece of work but emblematic of a larger problem. Unchallenged and exceptionally biased media.

Like I stated, I read and watch stuff I disagree with because I think it's wrong to live in an echo chamber. I don't read Guido now because he's too far off the scale. But if he's an alcoholic I'll feel sorry for him. I've also had a few in the family. There are plenty of other reasons to disagree with him without dwelling on his drink problem.

Drink problems make it even worse. Why do alcoholics or those who drink too much get a sympathy vote or a free pass? They and their behaviours destroy families, relationships, their children, their partners, their friends, their parents, and sometimes even total strangers when an alcoholic gets behind the wheel, crashes and kills one or multiple people. Most people whose lives have been destroyed by an alcoholic would be quite happy to see them burn because of that alone since it's the alcohol that drives the intolerable behaviour.

[cheesejunkie]

QuickQuack said:

Drink problems make it even worse. Why do alcoholics or those who drink too much get a sympathy vote or a free pass? They and their behaviours destroy families, relationships, their children, their partners, their friends, their parents, and sometimes even total strangers when an alcoholic gets behind the wheel, crashes and kills one or multiple people. Most people whose lives have been destroyed by an alcoholic would be quite happy to see them burn because of that alone since it's the alcohol that drives the intolerable behaviour.

Because it's a disease to be solved. Replace alco with any other condition and would you say the same? Would you be quite happy to see them burn?

Drunk drivers are drunk drivers, fk them. No sympathy vote from me.

Anyway, I don't care. It's fking Guido. I'll not exhaust any more oxygen defending him.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

Deesee said:

2007 Purchased Property.

2010 Married, registered children to husbands address, stayed on electoral roll at own address, her brother moved to her address (reg on roll).

2015 Sold property.

So we are expecting to see here, permission from mortgage company for consent to let, rental from brother declared on tax returns, CGT declared in relevant tax year and relevant discount paid back to the council as she had not been living there.

Sold property in the year she was elected also, perhaps this was all pointed out to her by a gov official.

If's she's done the above should be no issue.....

As I see it if she's paid back any discount (if in the timescale) then there's no problem.

If there was a 'mistake, I apologise' - I'm going to struggle with this as the T&Cs would have been clear.

[z4RRSchris]

relevant discount paid back to the council as she had not been living there.

Not sure this is accurate. the rest is. I bet she didnt pay CGT.

[chrispmartha]

She's explained it here

https://x.com/AngelaRayner/status/1762219581114884...


This just seems like a scraping the barrell smear campaign to me.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

chrispmartha said:

She's explained it here

https://x.com/AngelaRayner/status/1762219581114884...


This just seems like a scraping the barrell smear campaign to me.

"All before I was a MP". Immaterial if the CGT and discount were paid, no problem.

[chrispmartha]

Hugo Stiglitz said:

chrispmartha said:

She's explained it here

https://x.com/AngelaRayner/status/1762219581114884...


This just seems like a scraping the barrell smear campaign to me.

"All before I was a MP". Immaterial if the CGT and discount were paid, no problem.

Why would she have to pay CGT if her explanation is correct?

[Oakey]

I guess it depends on whether you believe her and her husband lived separately during that period.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

chrispmartha said:

Why would she have to pay CGT if her explanation is correct?

It all depends - She didn't live there for the entire period, she rented it to her brother.

[Oakey]

Can you prove that?

[Blue62]

chrispmartha said:

She's explained it here

https://x.com/AngelaRayner/status/1762219581114884...


This just seems like a scraping the barrell smear campaign to me.

Buckle in because there’s going to be much more of this tripe as the GE looms.

Does anyone remember the Labour activist assaulting a Tory adviser at St James hospital during the 2019 election campaign? A story broke that day about a child spending hours on the floor in A&E, so some wag at Tory HQ invented a story to deflect, unfortunately the leftie BBC fell for it and the real story was buried.

The Tories and their gutter press lost their moral compass when Bojo took the reins, we will witness worse now, that’s how far we have fallen.

[Killboy]

What am I supposed to be mad about now?

[chrispmartha]

Hugo Stiglitz said:

chrispmartha said:

Why would she have to pay CGT if her explanation is correct?

It all depends - She didn't live there for the entire period, she rented it to her brother.

That’s not what she’s said happened. Have you got evidence to the contrary?

[London424]

Oakey said:

I guess it depends on whether you believe her and her husband lived separately during that period.

I’ve got a bridge to sell if anyone is in the market…

[119]

chrispmartha said:

Hugo Stiglitz said:

chrispmartha said:

Why would she have to pay CGT if her explanation is correct?

It all depends - She didn't live there for the entire period, she rented it to her brother.

That’s not what she’s said happened. Have you got evidence to the contrary?

Where's the evidence she didn't?

Because she said so?

[chrispmartha]

119 said:

chrispmartha said:

Hugo Stiglitz said:

chrispmartha said:

Why would she have to pay CGT if her explanation is correct?

It all depends - She didn't live there for the entire period, she rented it to her brother.

That’s not what she’s said happened. Have you got evidence to the contrary?

Where's the evidence she didn't?

Because she said so?

All I have done is posted her account of what happened, I didn't post anything as fact, but you did, hence asking where your evidence is?

[ZedLeg]

From her statement, I'd be surprised if she was charging her brother rent. I'd imagine it was a benefit to have someone in the house when you're running around with a new marriage and sick children.

[otolith]

Breaking news! Rachel Reeves reported to have put an empty yoghurt pot in her paper recycling bin! New antisemitism allegations to be investigated after Sir Keir Starmer is reported to have laughed at the "big nose" joke in The Life Of Brian in 1979! It's all over for Labour! Read all about it in the Daily Wail!

[rscott]

Hugo Stiglitz said:

chrispmartha said:

She's explained it here

https://x.com/AngelaRayner/status/1762219581114884...


This just seems like a scraping the barrell smear campaign to me.

"All before I was a MP". Immaterial if the CGT and discount were paid, no problem.

To be eligible for the discount, you simply need to own the house for at least 5 years - nothing in the right to buy rules says you have to live there for all that time, so there's possibly only a CGT issue at most.