Rachel Reeves let out house unlawfully

You need the sack to put the body in ….

Witzend, the answer to your question is a resounding no. They have special rules for everything, they make their rules up.

If you are hung , drawn and quartered, giving you the sack is somewhat superfluous, surely.

windmill1

Rosie51

I thought it was 'ignorance is no defence under the law"? If that goes for the ordinary man/woman why would it be different for an MP? I'm not suggesting she should be hung drawn and quartered or even sacked, but why should she get more sympathy or leeway than Joe Bloggs who was similarly ignorant?

Well, allow moi to suggest she should be hung, drawn and quartered plus get the sack.

Thank you.

The BBC said it's emails sent and received by her husband...

MaizieD

Galaxy

I think it is escalating, 'new information' apparently.

Who is escalating it, Galaxy?

Oh, don't bother. I've found it on the BBC

Yes, there is. From Sky News:

‘We've just heard from Downing Street that they have more information in the saga of Rachel Reeves and her rented out house.
It seems like this might actually help the chancellor, as Sky News deputy political editor Sam Coates explains.
"What does this tell us?
"That when these emails are disclosed - and the fact that Number 10 have said that they're coming suggests that they'll come pretty soon - it will probably be good news for the chancellor.
"It will probably, reading between the lines, mean that those emails in some way vindicate the account of the chancellor, that she wasn't told, was misled, or wasn't informed that she needed to apply for this licence by the lettings agency.
"That is entirely my surmise from the fact that Number 10 is saying that it has full confidence in Rachel Reeves."’

We will know shortly I guess.

Galaxy

I think it is escalating, 'new information' apparently.

Who is escalating it, Galaxy?

M0nica

MaizieD

Has it occurred to anyone that it might have been Reeves' husband who dealt with letting their house?

Doesn't make any difference. They are both members of the same household and in any situationwhen one of the responsible adults in a household may have special circumstances surrounding their job the other adults should be completely up to speed on this and know when things need to be drawn to their attention, or passed through checking procedures.

You check up on everything your husband does to make sure he's got it right?

I trust my DH to be a perfectly competent individual...

I think it is escalating, 'new information' apparently.

Borris had birthday cake with people he worked with in lockdown personally I think this avoidance by Rachel is more serious How much rent does she pay on the home she has on downing street or is that another MP perk maybe ?

If RR can't be bothered to check details about letting her house wonder what else she doesn't bother to check. £3,200 a month rent, not bad at all.

Allira

Oh dear.

I do hope it's not a long-term let. She may be needing it back before long.

If only!!!

More trivia. Of more interest is the rip off attitude of local Councils making money from landlords.

If the property needed a license, then surely the letting agents shouldn't have let it out without one. I'm no fan of RR but this out-cry is just ridiculous.

Well we always have the BBC and the Guardian to set matters straight and give a balanced view 🤭

Maremia

The Press choses whose dirt it digs for though, doesn't it?
The Press Barons are not public servants working for the common good, are they?
They have an agenda, and it is not pro-Labour, is it?

You are probably right on all three.

GrannyGravy13

vegansrock

Im guessing she doesn't do all the family life admin herself. She has a husband. Let’s criticise him.

Whether it is his her husband’s mistake , hers or the letting agents, it happened.

As someone pointed out upthread ignorance is no defence under the law

An apology wouldn’t wash for Jo Bloggs.

Given there is no national rules, I would expect a local letting agent to point these things out. In both cases the weasely professionals did not do their job properly (getting more common these days) and the customer takes the blame.

An apology would be acceptable for Joe Bloggs, but it would may be accompanied by paying a fine, I guess. Planning infringements are not treated as serious, just fixed retrospectively.

Is the Tory or Reform party paying for this digging into personal finances/lives of the cabinet members??

Why are we witch hunting to detract from letting otherwise extremely busy (swamped) people from getting on with their job?

The Press choses whose dirt it digs for though, doesn't it?
The Press Barons are not public servants working for the common good, are they?
They have an agenda, and it is not pro-Labour, is it?

* not a question of dishonesty.

Maremia

Naw, don't think you're wrong Romolo.

Isn’t that what a free press does? Or do you want the press censored? The report isn’t untrue and RR owned up when this became public knowledge. Yes, the press digs around for dirt, but I’m sorryif you’re in politics you have to be like Caesar’s wife, beyond reproach. It’s not so long ago that AR was calling out Tory sleaze and demanding the sacking of ministers. Well what goes around comes around! Blaming incorrect advice doesn’t hack it if you’re the Chancellor. It’s of a question of any dishonesty, it’s the careless incompetence that undermines her and the government.

What I’d like to know is, if any other landlord (not a friend of KS or in Parliament) said they’d made a genuine mistake in forgetting to register a rental property, would they also be let off with no fine or other sanction?

I do notice[and will be shouted down for this]
that those on the left of the Political spectrum, it seems to me, have a lower threshold and expectation of certain things, than those on the right.
Just my observation.

It exposes that they are worse at admin than some ordinary Joe's on the street.
Or worse at keeping the law. Which they sometimes are even involved in making.

It all further degrades our esteem of those in high office[what is left of it].

Romola Thu 30-Oct-25 15:13:25
"I may be wrong, but I don't think any of us on Gransnet has had the experience of handling a huge and responsible job with the opposition and the media making every effort to find ways of smearing them.
Both Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves (or their staff) have committed sins of omission, mistakes which they amended.
I find it distasteful the way people on this site jump on the bandwagon of reports in newspapers like the Daily Mail. Owners of those papers seek to make money by appealing to their readers' desire for metaphorical blood".

Absolutely Romola 👏 👏, plus after weeks of long hours campaigning for your party, you then win the election and up till the early hours of the morning until the results roll in- you are jubilant but dog tired.

Then within n to many more hours you're sitting in Downing Street at your first cabinet meeting. You're the first female Chancellor the country has had and all eyes of the press are on you. The public expects you to perform immediately and deliver against your manifesto promises asap. Arguably (I really am not trying to start a new thread) you have inherited a huge black hole in the public finances and the electorate is hoping things are going to get better, asap.

At the same time- you must pack up your current home, instruct letting agents and move into Downing Street within days.- whilst dog tired and with all your new role responsibilities and demands. No small feat.

Our elected political representatives are not super human, especially when transitioning from shadow cabinet to new role and all that entails. But we should expect transparency and integrity- hence my earlier suggestions. A level playing field for all and an annual reckoning/declaration.