Are the Radford's massive piss takers?

I actually think the fly on the wall type programmes in the early days were interesting, but I guess they have a limited appeal once you've done a series or 2 showing "normal life"

But the few programmes I've seen in the last few years (I didn't watch the latest series) just look like made scenarios and scripted stuff, it's clearly not real life, but I can't see that going to Disney several times a year and the Maldives and going away most weekends seems very "real life" for most people either.

I'm often bemused by the "they work really hard" narrative, to explain all the holidays, rather than they are part of the tv show. Noel doesn't appear to work long hours, and Sue has never had a job in the conventional sense (to generate income) so its pretty ridiculous to suggest his "hard work" at the pie shop is funding holidays that 90% of working people (with 2 or 3 childen) couldn't afford.

I think they’re clearly only doing it for content at this stage. I can’t imagine they actually like or want to go away so much.

It wouldn’t be as exciting or gain as many views (income for them) if they were posting about a regular Saturday afternoon at home, cleaning the shower doors and pairing school socks.

It’s absolutely baffling that they have “fans” who can’t see through them.

And all the admin of the passports and bookings, etc.

Anyone else think it’s not desirable to go on so many holidays? I like one or two a year but still find it a pain with packing beforehand and the laundry after etc.
i don’t envy them always being away!

They are never home to decompress,do any homework,bake,play with toys etc. always carted off somewhere. The children look malnourished 😯

They are always somewhere, they never seem to be at home.

Seems like they are in center parcs this week

I wonder how much of the costs of their holidays they manage to set against tax at least, given that they use content for their social media accounts every time they travel?

(The pie factory being apparently the far smaller of the two businesses.)

I also noticed that Sue is only a director of the pie shop and not the media company.

Universal Credit seem particularly opposed to anything food related or utilities related which given they are a pie factory, must make things tricky.

But joking aside when I was a sales rep back in the day we could spend up to £10 a day on lunch and that was fully deductible. Universal credits would have a turn.

Happy to stand corrected. Although I’d be really interested in their deductibles.

@itsgettingweird I agree with you but plenty of people who run businesses are not possessed with sparkling intelligence. I'm thick myself, left school at 16. So I'm not being snobby. I guess I just don't understand the reasons why someone would have such a big family. Your assessment about their attachment issues may well be spot on.

I think the reality of it is that too Many people were claiming top ups from universal credits for non-viable businesses.
That never stood a chance of making more than minimum wage.
Mine does make more than minimum wage, but actually I could expense a hell of a lot more than I do and get below that threshold.
Equipment is a really good example. Mine needs replacing every three years but universal Credit ‘s only allow for it to be replaced every five.
So there are years where I’m paying to go to work but it’s still better than going to work whilst trying to juggle a family.

It absolutely is. I’ll find you the quote. They consider every Penny to be mine.

For universal credit, if you are an owner or director of a limited company you are treated as though you are self-employed and the company income treated as your self-employed income.

A good example is HMRC Consider the Christmas party reward for staff to be tax deductible up to £300 per Director.
And £300 per staff member and staff members, families or partners.
Universal credits would not allow that deduction. b

Thats a myth btw

It’s also very easy to keep the benefits coming in if you’re self employed as you can manage what you take as pay to stay on the right side of limits. It’s different to PAYE. You pay yourself little in dividends to declare as income. I have no idea if the Radfords do this but given the relatively low level of their assets it seems very possible

• • the self-employed are all allocated benefits on the basis of a minimum income whether they earn it or not so I believe the minimum income is the equivalent of minimum wage £25,000 so that is what they will be allocated Universal credits on the basis that they’re receiving.
    But not only that as a limited company not all of the money belongs to me. If I make 60 grand in a year and 30 grand of it is running costs and the rest comes to me via salary and dividends. Universal credits will deduct £60,000 and then ask me to account for the other 30,000 which they may or may not deem to be acceptable whether they are required to run the business or not.
    So as an example travel costs absolutely fine. I could go up and down the country all day long sit on a train £60 a day absolutely fine. Gas, electric and utilities for working from home not allowable beyond a certain threshold which doesn’t touch the sides.
    You can demonise them all you like for many things, but not that.

😂

Guessing no one is going to want to buy next door are they

You're not wrong there 😁

I guess theirs is too!

But that’s not exactly true, is it? Influencers are businesses and many of the things they are gifted are benefits in kind and therefore taxable. They’ll need a good accountant and hope that they’re not under too much scrutiny really.

I find this thread fascinating with so much discussion on the pie shop’s possible finances but almost no one looking at the company accounts posted near the start. The pie shop has assets of around just 20k and a directors’ loan of a similar amount. The social media account is higher, at just over 100k but another substantial directors’ loan. Their assets do not add up to these multiple expensive trips but they’re not declared as gifts. Very mysterious.

It’s also very easy to keep the benefits coming in if you’re self employed as you can manage what you take as pay to stay on the right side of limits. It’s different to PAYE. You pay yourself little in dividends to declare as income. I have no idea if the Radfords do this but given the relatively low level of their assets it seems very possible.

And from what I can see virtually none of their children is working in a role that will make them a net contributor.

The house next door is apparently a HMO.

I think it was made into flats next door

Was an elderly couple who lived there ages ago

They sold. Surprise

I’m interested in what it means to be a perfectly good parent.

To my mind they found the only way they could support their children was to monetise them.

All of this seems very very far from being a perfectly good parent to me.

And on top of that, all the disruption of the camera crews there most of the time. You'd never feel able to come down for a coffee in your dressing gown with the curtain open, as you just know you'd be caught in the background in the middle of the universe's biggest yawn ever!

I often wonder: when you see them entering their house, with what looks like another one attached to it on the left - is that one actually somebody else's house, or has it been procured and knocked through so that the whole double-fronted building is theirs?

"literally hundreds of these people" In what capacity? as relatives with whom you have frequent contact, as colleagues, as neighbours, as clients ? and they are all one amorphous group who act and think in exactly the same way?