To think that surely Rayner has to go.

[Blankscreen]

Well well well.

So now it emerges that Rayner rearranged her property affairs and declared to HMRC that her new flat in Brighton is her main residence and saved £40k on the SDLT bill as a result.

She has then apparently declared to the local councils the complete opposite.

I'm sure slimeball Kier will defend and say it was perfectly legal blah blah blah.

Not to mention she has a grace and favour house funded by tax payers in London as her constituency office is so far away. Yet she 'lives' in Brighton - surely she could just commute that distance like may others do every day.

Surely she has to go.

'Some on here are absolutely horrible people, delighting at others suffering, this isn' politics we should aspire too'

The problem is Rayner herself has been extremely unpleasant in the past delighting at others suffering.

It's the hypocrisy and double standards that have been her downfall not the amount involved and whether other politicians used 'flips' aka as tax loopholes too.

No but you weren’t accepting my point and you told me not to discuss an active case so now you’re silly.

I think you’ve lost your way in this discussion.

So we may as well leave it there.

And the bad advice lie.

People have delighted in others going, they just don’t like it when it’s their own lot.

Has she?

Has she gone after an individual in distress?

She certainly called a group of tories scum, which btw i'm not defending.

Went after a least 3 Tories who avoided very large amounts of tax, attacked Bojo for holding parties whilst others couldn't be with their dying loved ones....

But as far as i'm aware didn't reduce someone to tears, which btw is what Bojo did to a female MP who complained of assault.

Fallow ground to delight at Tories resigning..... very few ever did.... & when it did happen, it was the Tories themselves who wanted them gone.... Truss etc.

Yes you're right anyone in crocodile tears is not a good look. She needs to work on that I didn't see her in tears discussing the welfare reforms and how badly that would impact vulnerable people with disabilities who don't have 2 expensive homes.

She has shouted, abused, sneered, mocked tried to take the high ground and has made an absolute fool of herself.

Who, I mean who in such a senior position would tell half a story to the local conveyance firm and think that would suffice as 'expert advice'?!

😂 funny that! You running out of steam?

She’s a hypocrite and I think she should go. It’s only a matter of time with this sort of character.

Agreed. She'll be gone by next week. She's either incompetent or dishonest; or both.

I and many peoole I know have had misdiagnosis or lacking treatment within the NHS but if we all went sueing the NHS there would be no NHS. She left a hospital with a child, 70pcnt of women who give birth at 23 weeks dont. Claim for anything else but in that situation its ungrateful,the hospital must have done many things right for months the baby stayed and needed 24/7 care.

That child was left with care needs that will cost millions over his lifetime. Any responsible parent would do their utmost to do everything possible to ensure they’re looked after financially. I’d like to see the stats that show 70% of parents with a child disabled to the point of never having a normal life don’t sue. You’re just raking up more stuff to throw at her in typical lynch mob fashion.

Is there really any need for this?

While I see where you’re coming from, there must have been negligence and, in my experience, unless a patient does take action the default response is to deny and cover up. That doesn’t improve the NHS, and it doesn’t reduce the chance of it happening again. Yes, it costs the NHS money in the short term. But the corrective measures put in place save money, and more important further patients suffering, in the future. No one should tolerate sub standard care ‘because NHS’.

We don’t, and shouldn’t, know the details of her son’s case but we should be grateful that she took action. It won’t have been easy. It has undoubtedly made the hospital review its processes and helped reduce the probability of a repeat of whatever their negligence was. I know, having been there, though not in such tragic circumstances, challenging ‘the system’ is hard, it’s distressing and is like banging your head against the wall. We were fortunate enough to be articulate, sharp elbowed middle class patients with deep pockets and so could take on the system. I’m glad that Rayner did too.

How can you be sure she isn't genuinely distressed? Rigby who was there says they were genuine.

So we all want Welfare reform but with no cuts.... You do realise what reducing the benefits bill really means?

People, either existing or in the future, will get less or no money.

Rayner says she got advice from 3 sources, has she said one of them was the Conveyancer? do you know what info she gave them?

Are you defending Zahawi? Jenrick? or Hunt? should they have resigned? if not, why should Rayner?

I think everyone should sue for misdiagnosis or medical negligence, nhs insurance covers it. Lessons are apparently learnt when hcps have to answer for their incompetence.

What I do not agree with is using a child's disability in a media interview in any way to try and garner sympathy to excuse a mistake because it is 'complex'. Yep many with disabled relatives know life is complex. Many others with 'complex' lives made themselves ill worrying about Labour reforms.

We can all put property in trust for our kids but obviously whilst under 18 their finances remain the parent's legal responsibility. How on earth didn't she know that?

Well it’s an issue she’ll only face for another year because Rayner’s disabled son is now 17 and his finances will become his own legal responsibility next year. At which point she’ll quite legitimately be able to reclaim the second property stamp duty excess because it will be inside the three year window.

We don’t know anything about the disabled child, causes, liability, what might have been accepted or denied by the NHS.

I really don’t think anyone should try to poke around in that.

All I’ll say is that there is a trust and AR should have managed her affairs accordingly. She didn’t, on her own admission. For a loudly outspoken scourge of Tory misconduct she looks very foolish and will, I think, have to go.

She’s a busted flush now.

It wasn’t appropriate language but I don’t think she can be blamed for the horrendous culture of abuse across social media, which has been growing for years. Her comments - which she apologised for - came off the back of her receiving death threats.

Many politicians have indulged in using abrasive language and nicknames and many of them have trended on social and mainstream media. I’m sure you’re familiar with the reality, which is that people are nuts - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c334mj5l3ymo

Well yes sadly the damage has been done.

We can all put property in trust for our kids but obviously whilst under 18 their finances remain the parent's legal responsibility. How on earth didn't she know that?

This isn’t quite right. The trustees are responsible for managing the trust but it’s not automatic that the parents are trustees. There will also be more than one trustee who would have to sign off any decisions, and access to assets for the child when they turn 18 are dependent on the type of trust arrangement. I don’t think AR has specified whether she or someone else is responsible for the trust.

Of course the parents (if they retain parental responsibility, which in this case they do) are responsible for the child’s financial wellbeing in other ways.

You’re sad? You’re absolutely revelling in this.

It’s a pity she didn’t wait then

You must be as sad as the Labour lot were when Truss went, get it right ;

Yep