The matter of Angela Rayner's house sale isn't going away.....

Bloody hell! Now we have got Grant Shapps/Richard Green/ talking about this, he who threatened to sue a constituent for stating that he(Shapps) was using an alias, but then backed down when it was proved to be the truth. Surreal

I hope justice will be done, Casdon. I believe in the old saying ‘there’s no smoke without fire’ and I also have regard to the evidential value of what her neighbours are reported to have said. If she has, as alleged, committed two criminal offences she must answer for them.

Yes, but Angela has a strong northern accent.

Meanwhile, Michele Mone pocked £67 million of taxpayers money for useless PPE and nothing is done…just sayin.

Germanshepherdsmum

I don’t - can’t stand her. It would be good to see her hoisted by her own petard.

It would be good to see justice done - or at least that’s what one would expect a lawyer to say?

They did all this to Starmer, though.
He said he would resign immediately if any of it was proven.

Everyone likes to bash Angela.

I expect there will be a few along on this thread before long.

Germanshepherdsmum

I don’t - can’t stand her. It would be good to see her hoisted by her own petard.

Surprise surprise😀😀😀😀

I don’t - can’t stand her. It would be good to see her hoisted by her own petard.

I'm not even a particular fan of Angela either (except her hair ...)

I think it just beggars belief that it's 🤬 expletive deleted Ashcroft who is pursuing this.

I so hope she is entirely innocent of all this.

That was in response to Devorgilla.

As for the electoral matter.

The Electoral Commisson says:

If you split your time between two homes, you may be able to register to vote at both addresses. For example, you might own two properties and split your time between them, or you might spend time at different family addresses.

Being registered at two addresses doesn't necessarily mean you get two votes.

You will need to ^choose one address and vote in only that area when you're voting in:^

UK Parliament elections
UK referendums
London Assembly and London Mayoral elections

You can't vote at both addresses at these elections. Voting in more than one location is a criminal offence.

For other elections you can vote at both addresses.

You can choose to vote in either or both areas (as long as the addresses are in different council areas) when you're voting in:

Local council elections in England
Police and Crime commissioner elections and mayoral elections

www.electoralcommission.org.uk/voting-and-elections/who-can-vote/other-registration-options/voting-and-second-homes

As I understand it, her husband’s property was a mile away and is in the same Parliamentary constituency but is in a different council ward.

So she could vote once in Stockport consituency wherever she was registered (in say the 2010 GE) and twice in local elections in different wards if she registered at both addresses.

Again, I see no major crime here.

I doubt it - that wouldn’t be a valid reason.

Right so far two issues.

The first is

Rayner purchased her house in 2007 for £79k. She sold it in 2015 for £127500. So given that by the time she sold it she was married and lived at least some of the time at her husbands house, she may well be subjected to capital gains tax and without any set off, like improvement etc she may owe about £3k+ in capital gains. However it is almost certain that it will be a lot less and almost certainly there will be none due.

The second is the charge that she lied about where she lived at the time that she became a Labour Party candidate. Rayner registered the house that she owned as her permanent address and not the address of her husband with whom she spent time. It is noted that she was registered to vote at her own home and never at her husbands residence.

It seems that like many couples (even some on GN😀) Rayner had a loose relationship with her living relationship and she guarded her independence.

However we will wait and see what the police decide.

Also, his comments on it would muddy the waters. He's quite right to let the relevant authorities deal with it.

Perhaps KS hasn't asked to see the advice out of professional courtesy to the Law firm.

Thanks TinSoldier

Actually, I think CGT is an unfair tax anyway.

Devorgilla

AR has said repeatedly she sought legal advice when selling her house and was assured she had done everything correctly. I don't think she is a trained lawyer or indeed accountant. If the advice she was given, and presumably paid for, was inaccurate does she have a case against the Law firm?

If they were that useless they're probably defunct by now.

It was years ago.
Recollections may vary.

Worse case scenario.

Rayner owned the house for eight years from 2007 and 2015 and made a capital gain of £48,500. It is not know if this number takes into account incidental costs of purchase, costs incurred in improving the asset and incidental costs of sale all of which would which would reduce the overal gain.

I’m assuming it was her principle private residence for three years until 2010 and that on marrying, she and her husband elected that his property to be considered their principle private residence for capital gains tax. They had two years to make the election. If they didn’t then HMRC would considered the case based on fact - where Rayner was spending most of her time.

If a dwelling-house has been used as its owner’s only or main residence at some time in his or her period of ownership, then the final part of the period of ownership will always qualify for relief.

The purpose of the final period exemption is to help the owner occupier who puts their house up for sale but cannot find a buyer

For disposals on or after 6 April 2014 but before 6 April 2020 the final period of ownership that qualifies for CG64985 relief was 18 months.

www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/capital-gains-manual/cg64985

At most, Rayner has CGT to pay for three and half years out of eight - a net chargeable gain of £21,218 but remembering this may not include deductible expenses.

The annual CGT exemption for 2014/15 was £11,000 so assuming she had no other chargeable gains, then £10,218 is taxable. Treated at the top slice (any part of a taxable gain exceeding the upper limit of the income tax basic rate band (£31,865 for 2014/15) tax is charged at 28% = £2861. With interest and penalties say £3,000.

This is a matter for HMRC not the police. At worst she has been badly advised thinking that as this was the only property she owned then it was exempt from CGT not realising that getting married is not advantageous in this circumstance.

So why doesn’t she share the advice, even if only with Starmer?

When she wasn't an MP but presumably a working woman like the rest of us, leading a complicated family life, she may quite possibly have failed to notice the council tax implications of which ex-council house was her main residence

Pass the popcorn …
Right 🍿 Here goes!

Perhaps geography wasn't her strongest subject at school?
I remember a quiz programme from years ago and one of the panel said the comment on his school report from the geography teacher was "This boy would do well to find his own way home"
😁

AR has said repeatedly she sought legal advice when selling her house and was assured she had done everything correctly. I don't think she is a trained lawyer or indeed accountant. If the advice she was given, and presumably paid for, was inaccurate does she have a case against the Law firm?

Pass the popcorn …

When she wasn't an MP but presumably a working woman like the rest of us, leading a complicated family life, she may quite possibly have failed to notice the council tax implications of which ex-council house was her main residence - before or after she married. When I've been involved in planning weddings and the complexities of combining two households, I'm sure I don't know which way is up for a while afterwards. Many of us may have slipped up on technicalities around such times. I think it's very important for our leaders and politicians to be honest. Can we expect them to be superhuman, though?