Baroness Uddin to repay £125,349

[john_p]

Remember her?

http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2010/10/pri...

Report said:

The Maidstone flat is the only property owned by Lady Uddin. Having designated it as her main residence, she claimed night subsistence for time spent away from Maidstone every week when the House was sitting; she claimed the mileage allowance for journeys to and from Maidstone every weekend when the House was sitting.

[...] statements "together prove, well beyond the balance of probabilities, that Lady Uddin in this period did not stay at the Maidstone property for the minimum of one weekend per month over the year when the House was sitting." [...]

On 24 April 2009 Lady Uddin became aware of the Sunday Times' interest in the Maidstone flat. From this point there is clear evidence of frequent visits to the flat ...

UNbelievable

Edited by john_p on Monday 18th October 16:19

[DJC]

Er no actually, I dont remember her at all.

[Asterix]

If she's not guilty, why pay it back?

If she is guilty, why isn't she having the book thrown at her?

[hornetrider]

Here are your three thieves on the take.

[wolves_wanderer]

I think the most nauseating out of these three thieves is Lord Paul.

One of the richest men in england and he still felt the need to buy a 1 bedroom flat on which to claim allowances.

He repaid the money stating that his integrity was not in question because he only claimed payments to which he was entitled.

This despite the fact that he must have only one reason for buying a property arguably unbecoming of one of the richest men in the country.

Absolute disgraces one and all

[zcacogp]

hornetrider said:

Here are your three thieves on the take.

F uck me.

I know precisely what I am thinking. And I know that I am not the only one thinking it.

And I also know that I would be castigated by certain elements on here were I to say it.


Oli.

Edited by zcacogp on Monday 18th October 18:02

[Magog]

zcacogp said:

hornetrider said:

Here are your three thieves on the take.

F uck me.

I know precisely what I am thinking. And I know that I am not the only one thinking it.

And I also know that I would be castigated by certain elements on here were I to say it.


Oli.

Edited by zcacogp on Monday 18th October 18:02

You think VBRJ is appropriate in this case?
You probably should be ashamed of yourself.

[Castrol Craig]

zcacogp said:

hornetrider said:

Here are your three thieves on the take.

F uck me.

I know precisely what I am thinking. And I know that I am not the only one thinking it.

And I also know that I would be castigated by certain elements on here were I to say it.


Oli.

Edited by zcacogp on Monday 18th October 18:02

+1 (million)

[tinman0]

zcacogp said:

hornetrider said:

Here are your three thieves on the take.

F uck me.

I know precisely what I am thinking. And I know that I am not the only one thinking it.

And I also know that I would be castigated by certain elements on here were I to say it.

I know, Lord Swraj Paul's collar is huge! Seriously needs someone to measure his neck size so he can wind it in.

(guy on the left).

[Marf]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

[Victor McDade]

What are you thinking?

That:

1 - they are all multi millionaires? Or
2- they are all of non Anglo-Saxon stock? Or
3 - they are all politicians?

zcacogp said:

hornetrider said:

Here are your three thieves on the take.

F uck me.

I know precisely what I am thinking. And I know that I am not the only one thinking it.

And I also know that I would be castigated by certain elements on here were I to say it.


Oli.

Edited by zcacogp on Monday 18th October 18:02[/footnote]

[footnote]Edited by Victor McDade on Monday 18th October 19:18

[hornetrider]

That she's the meat in a 3 way curry sandwich?

[hidetheelephants]

Victor McDade said:

What are you thinking?

That:

1 - they are all multi millionaires?
2- they are all of non Anglo-Saxon stock?
3 - they are all politicians?

zcacogp said:

hornetrider said:

Here are your three thieves on the take.

F uck me.

I know precisely what I am thinking. And I know that I am not the only one thinking it.

And I also know that I would be castigated by certain elements on here were I to say it.


Oli.

Edited by zcacogp on Monday 18th October 18:02

I'm more interested in the feet of clay TBH.

[AndrewW-G]

Would that be the same "Lord" Paul, who was one of labours largest donors, prior to the last election . . . . . . . . . . where are the people who were complaining about Ashcroft's tax status now?

[tinman0]

AndrewW-G said:

Would that be the same "Lord" Paul, who was one of labours largest donors, prior to the last election . . . . . . . . . . where are the people who were complaining about Ashcroft's tax status now?

Ah, but:

Tories: evil greedy people
Labour: cheeky bunch of scallies

[12gauge]

Dont worry about her, im sure she'll plead poverty (and suceed) just like another of labours clowns has done.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1321018/Al...

[Mojooo]

zcacogp said:

hornetrider said:

Here are your three thieves on the take.

F uck me.

I know precisely what I am thinking. And I know that I am not the only one thinking it.

And I also know that I would be castigated by certain elements on here were I to say it.


Oli.

Edited by zcacogp on Monday 18th October 18:02

The Lords are racists and only tackling ethnic minorities?

[zcacogp]

Mojooo said:

zcacogp said:

hornetrider said:

Here are your three thieves on the take.

F uck me.

I know precisely what I am thinking. And I know that I am not the only one thinking it.

And I also know that I would be castigated by certain elements on here were I to say it.

The Lords are racists and only tackling ethnic minorities?

They must be hellishly racist. Quick google suggests about 740 people in the lords at the moment, 17 of which are of "Black or asian race". Odds of the three convicted all being of an ethnic minority? Slightly more slender than one-in-a-million, according to my maths (which may well be faulty, but not by a factor of more than 10.)

So, one in a million chance? Or something else?




Oli.

[Iain328]

I'd quite like to know why she isn't heading for trial for theft/fraud?

[hidetheelephants]

Parliamentary privilege? Tarring and feathering seems more appropriate, followed by the state seizing her assets and liquidating them. Not only a criminal, an unrepentant one.