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

Her neighbours have said she didn’t live there. One called her an effing liar.

Malicious gossip! I dare say one of my neighbours would call me an effing liar and I would call her the same. Neither based on truth or evidence but based on the fact that we can’t effing stand each other

Why would anyone trust Rayner's ex neighbours?
Presumably thay are similar to her.
Speak roughly, are coarse and abrasive, and generally not "the sort of people" to be trusted.

I remember a lot of MPs, including the Yvette and Ed Balls, got very confused about two homes and the rules about flipping.

It must be very confusing for those who have more than one home.

If Rayner was not living in the house she owned because she had let it to her brother, she was not dividing her time between two homes. Her neighbours have said she didn’t live there. One called her an effing liar. No shortage of witnesses it seems.

RosiesMaw

Anyway there seem to be a lot of barrack room lawyers so I’ll keep out of the rights and wrongs.

So I’ll just offer this to lighten the mood perhaps?

Again Matt nails it 😂😂😂

MaizieD

Is it 'letting' if the person living in it pays no rent?

Is this your area of legal expertise, GSM?

Yes, and yes.

Anyway there seem to be a lot of barrack room lawyers so I’ll keep out of the rights and wrongs.

So I’ll just offer this to lighten the mood perhaps?

MaizieD

Is it 'letting' if the person living in it pays no rent?

Is this your area of legal expertise, GSM?

Suggesting -however respectfully - that GSM does not know that whereof she speaks?

It is exactly as I said. Here:

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

It 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.

Rayner's brother is her family. If she spends time at a different family address she can register there.

Again, even if the time she spend at her owned property was limited, what fraud has she committed? What unjust advantage has she obtained? Whose rights or interests has she injured?

Again, the Electoral Commission says that fraud includes:

*making false statements about the personal character of a candidate
*offering an incentive to someone to get them to vote, to vote a certain way, or to stop them from voting
*interfering with postal votes
*including false statements or signatures on a candidate’s nomination forms
*registering to vote under a false name or without someone’s consent
*influencing someone to vote against their will
*pretending to be someone else and using their vote

www.electoralcommission.org.uk/voting-and-elections/report-electoral-fraud

Is she alleged to have done any of those things?

Why can’t a sister and brother live in the same house

Is it 'letting' if the person living in it pays no rent?

Is this your area of legal expertise, GSM?

What the Electoral Commission say about dividing your time between two residences is not quite as you say TS. If Rayner had let the house she owned to her brother she would hardly have been resident there, would she?
www.electoralcommission.org.uk/voting-and-elections/who-can-vote/other-registration-options/voting-and-second-homes

Why is no bloody journalist - tabloid or broadsheet checking this? I can see it. Why can’t they?

You’re so right TinSoldier, and so well-informed. Thank you To answer your question … no-body wants to find the truth. Our government and media have become so corrupt that truth no longer matters. We really are living in the post-truth era. The only hope remaining is that the police still regard truth as important (although I’m not sure about that)! The police should not have given in to bullying by a Tory MP; they investigated this issue once and made a judgment; they should not be wasting time and money on this!

Desperate times for all Tories is the reason TinSoldier, drowning men clutch at straws. The tone of this thread has become quite spiteful I think. If she has deliberately broken the law not one person has condoned that, but still the same people keep on attempting to stick the knife in a bit deeper. Rationality is nothing to do with it, that’s why you’re being ignored.

I have valid and logical arguments not that any of the Rayner haters are acknowledging them.

I've lost count of how many times I have now posted this but nobody wants to read or admit it here.

The Electoral Commission’s own website says that if you divide your time between residences you can register at either or even both address so long as you do not vote more than once in a GE or referendum. If the properties are in different wards you can vote in council elections in both.

Why is no bloody journalist - tabloid or broadsheet checking this? I can see it. Why can’t they?

I have also posted about the timeline for the 2015 GE.

Rayner had sold her house before Parliament was dissolved and the date set for the GE. The deadline for nomination forms to be submitted was after she had sold her house. Even if she had put her old address on the nomination forms - possibly because she has completed them before the deadline (this was not a snap election) she would at most have received a caution if her old address had been printed on the ballot - which is what happened to a DUP candidate in 2019.

Again, what wrong has she done? What fraud has she committed bearing in mind that the definition of fraud is the using of false representations to obtain an unjust advantage or to injure the rights or interests of another.

What unjust advantage has she obtained? Whose rights or interests has she injured?

I have copyrighted it.

I’ll risk using it GSM!

Again, can some provide evidence of when Rayner has been critical of Right to Buy other than what she has been open about - her objection to the Tory increase in the discount to 60%. She bought her house with a 25% discount.

The link in the Independent article criticism over the sale of a former council house goes to a piece about Gaza. The link about pulling up the ladder goes to a piece about statutory sick pay.

The Chartered Institute of Housing have already said that homes are being sold at a discount exceeding what tenants have paid in rent. I have already posted about this.

Let me ask this of private landlords. Would you give allow your tenant to buy the property they have rented from you giving them a 60% discount on open market value at all and especially if it exceeded the rent they had paid you? I think the answer to that would be a resounding no.

Also, be cautious of what Ashcroft says. According to one reviewer, he admits in the acknowledgements of his own book that he did not do the research for it.

I have copyrighted it.

Ha, ha GSM ‘Deflection, the weapon of those who have no valid argument’. Thanks for that phrase - I’ll remember it. The Tories are masters of it! You can’t move for dead cats at Conservative Party Headquarters!

Deflection again growstuff - the weapon of those who have no valid argument.

Here are the simple facts as stated in the Telegraph:
www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/12/angela-rayner-council-house-police-probe-explainer/

Incidentally, is Ashcroft still a lord? I thought he resigned his seat in the House of Lords after questions were asked about his place of abode.

Aha! Another allegation! Is there any end to them? I repeat ... according to all the reliable reports I've read. the current police involvement concerns possible electoral fraud because allegedly Rayner put the wrong address on her nomination form ... nothing else! Not misusing Right to Buy, not avoiding capital gains tax, not being a gobby northern woman, not having a child out of wedlock when she was 16 or being coarse ... none of that!

👏👏👏 Growstuff and what about the following things that AR has done ‘wrong’ for which she deserves to be publicly pilloried:

*not bettering herself
*having long red hair
*not talkin’ proper
*having been divorced
*having looked after herself and her children
*having been a union rep
*worked in low paid jobs
*having had a life before politics
*wearing skirts in the HoC so the poor little Eton boys get distracted!

Germanshepherdsmum

Rayner has criticised those who take advantage of right to buy.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/angela-rayner-labour-lord-ashcroft-b2502151.html
Blatant hypocrisy.

Ah! Revealed by the "holier than thou" Lord Ashcroft, who has, I'm sure, never conducted a dodgy deal in his life. Hasn't he got anything better to do than dig up dirt?

growstuff
To be honest, if the media was harassing me to disclose any financial advice I'd received, I'd tell them to mind their own business. Any HMRC investigation is separate from the current police investigation.

Agree growstuff why should anyone give in to demands
from the press

My understanding is that Rayner bought the house in 2007. She married in 2010. She should have sold the house five years after she'd bought it - otherwise she would have been liable to pay back some of the discount. If she'd sold it in 2012 - before she'd been married two years - she wouldn't have been liable for Capital Gains Tax. After she married in 2010, her brother apparently lived in the house rent-free.

I don't know whose responsibility it would be to investigate the above - the local council? Whoever it is, it's not what the police investigation is about.

If she is found to have broken the law in some way - and it's possible - she should pay the money back, which I'm sure she could afford. She's also promised to resign.

What really sticks in the craw is the way Rayner has been hounded for something(s) she might (or might not) have done and even if she did whether she acted as she did through ignorance/misunderstanding of the rules or deliberate intent. None of us really knows.