Is Angela Raynor a liar or is it all anti Labour media bias?

[CormorantStrikesBack]

I’m well aware how anti Labour a lot of the main stream media seem to be so I wasn’t paying much attention previously to all the stuff about how she should have paid capital gains tax on her house, etc. she was adamant that she didn’t need to.

So it seems like she said it was her main residence so not liable for capital gains tax. But her husband and kids lived in a house a short distance away apparently for the first five years of their marriage which is unusual. A neighbour who lived next to her “husband’s” house said it was the main family home and Angela definitely lived there.

I’ll be sad if she has lied. Always thought she was on the side of the ordinary person. I guess the police/tax man might have a hard time proving anything though regardless of the neighbour’s statement. If all bills, etc were in the individual names there’s no evidence.

I disagree with taking evidence from the sensationalist Sun newspaper about anyone's romantic interests. They will always present things in as scandalous a way as possible.

Just because the Sun says it was a torrid affair doesn't mean it was. I thought everyone knew that much!

No i'm not, millions of kids are in absolute poverty, teachers have been buying them food and amazingly, some kids go to school with an empty lunch box, pretending it has food in it.

So yes, anyone inc MPs who allow this to happen are scum, esp as they fill out yet another expense claim for paper clips (Cameron) or their parent household energy costs (Braverman)

Sunak is now going to force RAF personnel to fly planes to Rwanda, because no airline in the world wants to be contaminated by association with the the scheme.

But Angela Rayner.

Forgive me, but if its true AR was living apart from her husband i.e living separately, then she is free to sell her house that she lived in free of CGT, as would her husband, she never was on the deeds of her husband's house.

As fa as i'm aware, AR has not said she has paid any CGT, either at the time or retrospectively.

If you are married you only have one nomination between you, even if you are not living together. I think!

As a married couple you can only have one property between you that qualifies for CGT exemption as your main residence. If you own more than one you have 2 years from marriage nominate which qualifies. It doesn't need to be the one you both live in. Once a nomination is made you can 'flip' it between two places.

If no nomination within 2 years then which property gets the exemption is decided by HMRC based on facts at time of sale.

She is a liar. And a tax dodger. And liars on one side of the government is no justification to have them on the other. I literally dispare that neither of the main parties prioritise integrity. Its not hard to do the right thing - its what most of us do and it is a pretty low bar to being in public office.

@sulkingsock and your evidence for liar/tax dodger is?

She wasn't living in the house. Her brother was. Rent free apparently. Who lives with their brother when their husband and children live nearby? Her neighbours have said she was living with her husband and children. Which would be normal.

So that's no then. You know nothing more than you're own interpretation of facts in te public domain.

Plenty of people get married but then don't live together.
How would her neighbours know? did they keep a log on her coming and goings?

This Govt has a habit of accusing people of things that are later proven to be false... the latest is PO CEO Nick Read, accused by Badenoch of a whole list of issues but now exonerated of all wrongdoing.....

Bit like you.

Watson told BBC Radio Manchester: “I’m going to say very little about this because in truth we don’t give running commentaries on live investigations. However, I know that it’s very topical.

“All I would say is, in line with what we have put out publicly, there are a number of assertions knocking about. I don’t need to tell people that.”

He added: “That is a neutral act, it does not imply that the information gives us any hard and fast sort of evidence upon which to base anything at this stage. It is simply: we have an allegation, these allegations are of course all over the news, we are going to get to the bottom of what has happened.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/17/angela-rayner-police-investigation-gmp

Is it really true that ‘plenty’ of people marry and live apart?

I must have lived a sheltered life. I find married people very unlikely - in fact almost never - to live in different homes. Separated spouses are in a different position, obviously.

Yes well he did his job and basically said we have to go through all this mess with a fine tooth comb owing to the volume of complaints. That doesn't mean they are justified and if they are politically motivated then I hope consideration will be given to wasting police time. It seems the officer above has sensibly considered that volume does not equal significance

Is it really true that ‘plenty’ of people marry and live apart?

Work did it for us and IL for a few years and actually a few couple I can think of - away in week or few weeks if working abroad. There are careers that expect geographical moves and with two careers kids in school and house being bought not so easy to follow.

It's not common though - otherwise people wouldn't have been telling my kids we must be splitting up.

I'm still not clear what she is supposed to have done or how credible the allegations are.

How would her neighbours know? did they keep a log on her coming and goings?
Also neighbours do notice stuff - depends if there are around working from home retired or just in - you see people on streets to nod to out of window coming and going and noise levels in immediate ones - you generally just know who is living where.

I haven't spoke to lads opposite - we are on junction but they've come out with accidents seen them parking cars and entering houses when looking out windows for other reasons or walking by house. I was aware from coming and goings and parking and living noise levels when adult daughter moved back in next door with boyfriend. Last house DH was out 12 hours a day then away all week still knew who was roughly in which house - saw them in front on rare occasions walking kids in and weekends. DH was taken back with pfb we'd move into new city rental property and day after I'd gone in to have her several neighbours DH never seen before stopped to ask if I'd had the baby - apparently our lights weren't on at usual time and while they hadn't spoken to me either had seen me heavily pg walking down streets.

I image it's area dependent commuter belt and London maybe being different but where I've lived most people are just vaguely aware of who lives where.

There is now open comment about the complaints against Rayner and it is critical against these mysterious complainants. Somebody in the Conservative Party has a brain and is beginning to realise if this the bar for her it will be the bar for them too. What a prat James Daly is.

So it doesn’t matter if you live together or not?

I can see the political calculation - that complaining about these domestic arrangements given the small amounts of money involved - might look unattractive to some.

But I can’t see how there’s any new bar being set. Rayner would have been all over a Tory in the same circumstances. There’s nothing special or different about this case, in fact it’s more understandable than usual that she is being asked to account for herself as she’s so keen to vilify others.

There have been celebrity couples who do and i personally know 2 couples who married but carried on living in their own homes, one of these even lives in another country!

However, i don't know anyone with children, these were older couples both on 2nd marriages.

There are web pages on it and books written on the subject.... there is even a name for it "Living apart together"

On CGT, married but living apart, depends if you own more than one house, AR was on the deeds of a single property only, which she says she lived in and according to my conveyancing solicitor who i ve just been to see, she says CGT is not payable in this situation.... hence no action from HMRC.

Its the amount of attention this is getting, daily headlines, on political debating programs, TV news... God! its even made MN.....

Did Zahawi get this? Jenrik? Hunt? ... all involved in multi million pound tax and planning issues.

Nope, little MSM interest and i don't believe any made these hallowed threads.

Of course they made the news, newspaper comment and social media, all over the place. I haven’t bothered to search MN but even on this thread allegations against those people have been wheeled out.

I suspect that you feel the present story more because you’re a Labour and Rayner supporter. That’s perfectly understandable.

Zahawi did get his own thread on here, NCA was involved in his case iirc.

@WhatsTheUseOfWorrying - what I mean is, it's not that Rayner is immune from investigation. Patently she is not immune as she is being.

However, prosecution of crime is subject to intent (is there evidence she intended to make a gain) and then (public interest- she was a private citizen at the time of the allegations).

This is what I mean about resetting the bar. If the Conservatives want this standard to apply to them then they are setting a difficult precedent for themselves when they are shortly to be out of office. And it is a much lower bar than that which they applied to their own Ministers, see NZ.

My tuppence is that this case will not meet the test for the CPS. But unhelpfully, it will mean that this kind of thing will now be a tool against all politicians. Mr Daly has thrown a few stones which I think his colleagues do not like. They too had lives before politics. It is a mistake.

Daly is still refusing to say what he thinks Rayner has done wrong

https://x.com/SkyNews/status/1780567186836246565

"Why won't you say?" asks Sky's @BethRigby

Conservative James Daly MP refuses to answer multiple times when asked what he thinks Angela Rayner has done wrong, despite being the person who contacted the police about her.

That’s not hard to fathom. A complaint to the police is privileged. An allegation on air would open someone up to a libel claim. It’s perfectly standard.