• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Keir Starmer at it again..

Aye, I don't know what the license is or does, but if it doesn't benefit her financially and it's just a nothingy admin thing then is it really that big of a deal?
It’s a legal requirement and it does benefit her financially as she is able to rent her house because she has use of tax payer funded accommodation.
 
But it's just an admin oversight rather than a fraud, it's not like she's running a slum and avoiding the licence so she doesn't have to buy smoke detectors. I'd wager most people had never even heard of them until yesterday. They're not used in the majority of cases, so it's an understandable thing for someone to miss imo. Her letting agents obviously should've known better
 
But it's just an admin oversight rather than a fraud, it's not like she's running a slum and avoiding the licence so she doesn't have to buy smoke detectors. I'd wager most people had never even heard of them until yesterday. They're not used in the majority of cases, so it's an understandable thing for someone to miss imo. Her letting agents obviously should've known better
I agree, it is an oversight and inadvertent. But Starmer now wants to apply his "can't be a law maker and a law breaker" commitment selectively. Reeves broke the law.
 
What’s the punishment in the real world here for breaking this law? Prison sentence, community service, fine, slap on the wrist?
 
BBC News - Chancellor admits breaking housing rules by renting out homes in wha

One for @EpsomWolf. I'll admit, I just did a massive facepalm IRL 🤦‍♂️

Might surprise you but I want to give her a pass on this one. There’s not much to see in terms of the error itself, but the damage is in what it might say about her perceived competence (or lack of), and of course when a law is broken someone in her position is in real trouble.

As for the initial error, the administrative implementation of Selective Licensing has been a debacle; different councils introducing it at different times, with different qualifying criteria, with different pricing, and different ways (including not bothering at all) of notifying landlords of it’s necessity. Some are so hopeless and stuck in a backlog they even allow to you let before the licence is granted, as long as there is a formal application and fee paid with reference number. That said, if she’s used an agent they would know about this and automatically request the licence prior to agreeing the tenancy, so I’m assuming she’s found the tenant and agreed an assured shorthold tenancy agreement herself, which seems ridiculous given her position and the need for everything to be watertight.

That would suggest to me she’s let it to an acquaintance or family member which you can understand might be seen as a safe option, but as with Ange and her original RtB, the devil is in the detail and you trip yourself up very quickly, although there is little doubt there is no intent of any avoidance, evasion or any financial gain whatsoever from RR.

So in essence I think it’s likely to just be very clumsy but not a great look for a Chancellor at all. As for the law break, it’s unfortunate, but again, this is the Chancellor we are talking about so it’s hardly surprising the gloves are off.

One last thing, assuming it’s just very poor knowledge and admin form her, I bloody well hope she is aware of the 2025 changes to the Right to Rent checks required from landlords, extending to checking immigration status and so on. An agency would ensure this is done, however, if you are arranging the tenancy yourself it’s a legal requirement you have to fulfill. Hard to believe she’d fall for that one and it really would be gold dust for her enemies, but if the SL has passed her by who knows….. but you can be sure some people will be digging hard.

Anyway, I’m not sure how to feel as it’s no more than an administrative cock-up and don’t think someone needs to be hung drawn and quartered for that, but given her position and the law break, she’s looking weak and in real trouble.
 
Last edited:
Rayner, Farage and Reeves. I’ve given an opinion on all of those cases based purely on the facts as best I understand them. Their backgrounds, gender etc are an irrelevance.

I’ll happily debate the points but not doing so and letting the awkwardness of some difficult truths leak out in personal insults with an unfounded inference of prejudice is imv unacceptable.
 
Looks like she’s used an agent so I’d say the onus is on them and she should be ok on the SL front.

The emails under review are from her other half so with him and the agent involved there’s a bit of distance between her and the ramifications.

That’s assuming there’s nothing else murky going on of course but until we know differently the latest is good news.
 
Media calling for Reeves to resign over a paperwork mistake by the agent she uses to do everything re her rented house.
media ignoring who bought Farages £800,000 house and where the money came from.
How does that work? Oh yea it’s Farage.
 
Apparently the emails are between the agent and the husband. To my mind he only email that could warrant further investigation on what was a closed matter are telling him they either need a licence or need to check with the council themselves, neither of which will be a good look after the plea and f ignorance
 
Turns out she was told she needed a licence…and it is the landlord’s responsibility to ensure they get one. Amazingly, they only found the email today which is completely believable.
 
She was told by the letting agent that they would sort the licence. She didn't follow up, I think that's bad news. I don't think it's a resignation matter tbh, not these days.
 
Back
Top