“We’ve taken on the Mail on Sunday and won. But the newspaper regulator won’t correct the story till after the election.”
Category Archives: Sleaze
“Boris Johnson said female suffrage only happened after cars invented ‘because men realised women could run them down’ “
An accompanying video shows Johnson speaking these words. Obviously a guy with a BIG problem with women!
“Boris Johnson said female suffrage only happened because men realised women could “run them down” with cars, in a video which has resurfaced on social media.
Mr Johnson made the bizarre comment to Sir Drummond Bone in an interview for Voices From Oxford in 2013 after he was asked about his 2007 book on cars, Life in the Fast Lane.
“I think that women’s liberation – female suffrage – probably wouldn’t have happened, if it hadn’t been for the motorcar,” the prime minister, who was then-Mayor of London, said.
“Basically because men realised that women were at the wheel of a machine that could run them down.” …
… “They were so hostile to women on bicycles that they would hang bicycles from trees to indicate their displeasure that women were being able to use these liberating pieces of technology,” he added.
“But of course, when the combustion engine allowed women to travel at many miles an hour and to be in a position of command, I think the game was up.”
“Senior British diplomat in US quits with tirade over Brexit ‘half-truths’ “
Not seen this in any British newspaper.
“… In her resignation letter, addressed to deputy ambassador Michael Tatham and which Hall Hall [correct name] shared widely with colleagues in the diplomatic service, she said that her departure had nothing to do with being “for or against Brexit, per se,” but instead was an expression of frustration about how the policy was being carried out.
Hall Hall, a 33-year veteran of the UK foreign service, and a former ambassador to Georgia, said UK institutions had been undermined and the reputation of British democracy abroad had been imperiled.
“I have been increasingly dismayed by the way in which our political leaders have tried to deliver Brexit, with reluctance to address honestly, even with our own citizens, the challenges and trade-offs which Brexit involves; the use of misleading or disingenuous arguments about the implications of the various options before us; and some behaviour towards our institutions, which, were it happening in another country, we would almost certainly as diplomats have received instructions to register our concern,” she wrote in her letter, dated December 3.
“It makes our job to promote democracy and the rule of law that much harder, if we are not seen to be upholding these core values at home.”
Delivering Brexit has been impossible. Stopping it will be even harder
Hall Hall said she could no longer reconcile her commitment to the job with the demands made of her. “I am also at a stage in life where I would prefer to do something more rewarding with my time, than peddle half-truths on behalf of a government I do not trust,” she wrote in the letter.
Though Hall Hall did not refer to Johnson or any other UK leader by name in her letter, she expressed concern about the divisive rhetoric that has characterized British politics since the Brexit referendum.
Johnson’s comments have hardened in recent months. He has attacked attempts to prevent a no-deal Brexit as “surrendering” to Brussels and dismissed fears that his language encourages supporters to abuse his opponents.
Johnson has defended his rhetoric, telling the BBC after a particularly rancorous parliamentary debate in September that avoiding such terms risked “impoverishing the language and diminishing parliamentary debate”.
Much of the blame for the strategy has been pinned on Johnson’s lead adviser, Dominic Cummings, who ran the Vote Leave campaign in the Brexit referendum of 2016 and is credited with creating the “Take Back Control” slogan. Cummings has been unrepentant over his tactics. …”
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/06/uk/top-british-diplomat-quits-brexit-intl/index.html
“Tories buy fake website bearing Labour MP’s name as party intensifies ‘dirty tricks’ campaign”
“The Conservatives are under fire for more “dirty tricks” after buying up a website address in the name of a Labour candidate – to tell voters to “stop Jeremy Corbyn.”
The domain name margaretbeckett.com – instead of promoting the former Labour foreign secretary, a candidate in Derby South – reads ‘Don’t Vote Labour’ and attacks her voting record.
A video of her Conservative rival, Ed Barker, carries the banner: “As the Labour candidate hasn’t set up her own website, I thought I’d do one for her.”
The stunt was attacked by Ms Beckett who told The Independent: “This seems to be more Tory dirty tricks, which is par for the course. It’s also a bit pathetic.
“If they were confident in their case, they would simply put that case forward instead of doing something like this to give people the wrong impression.”
Approached by The Independent, the Conservative Party did not deny that its candidate bought up the domain name and refused to comment.
The row comes after the controversies that saw the Conservatives set up both a fake ‘factchecking’ service and a fake Labour website that instead pumped out Tory policies.
At the weekend, Mr Corbyn protested that the succession of Tory stunts was bringing “politics and democracy into disrepute”. …”
Book Review – Boris Johnson “72 Virgins” (a real book by Bojo available on Amazon)
“So it turns out In 2004, Boris Johnson wrote a “book of fiction” called ’72 Virgins’.
It’s about a group of Islamic terrorists who attack Westminster, whose plot is then foiled by a bicycling Tory MP known for tousled hair, classical allusions and flapping shirt-tails.
As the story develops, the protagonist seizes the opportunity to make himself such a lauded global hero that the media will deem it absolutely futile to print the latest thing he doesn’t want his wife to discover.
Ever the cretinous glutton, with a deeply false belief in his own guile, that very subplot increased in intrigue when, within two months of publication, fiction turned fact and Johnson was sacked from the shadow cabinet after the then Tory leader, Michael Howard, judged him to have lied to the party and to the public about his extramarital affair (lying no longer seems to be a sackable offence for conservative politicians, but rather the gold standard).
This book is brimming with terms such as “alpha male,” “Islamic nutcases” and “a mega-titted six-footer”. Arabs are casually noted to have “hook noses” and “slanty eyes”; A mixed-race Briton is called “coffee-coloured”; and slurs of “pikeys” and people who are “half-caste”.
Imagine the absolute outrage if Jeremy Corbyn wrote this book?
Laura Kuenssberg would never shut up squawking about it!
The BBC would lead with it on every story & it would be front page of every tabloid rag!
But he didn’t, Johnson did, so, of course, we NEVER hear about it.
He describes French people as ‘turds’ and makes strange personal attacks on Sierra Leone.
In the final third of the book, the plot becomes rushed and there are multitudinous printing and grammatical errors, and a number of sentences that literally do not make any sense.
The novel’s attitude to women is so rampantly sexist, it is depressing. In the 20 occasions in which women enter the narrative either the narrator or a character sizes them up and down, phwoaring over, to give a few examples: “tits out”, “lustrous eyes”, “long legs”, “a mega-titted six-footer”, “loads of pretty white teeth”, “good teeth and blonde hair”, and an “unambiguously exuberant bosom”.
One Female characters comment is attributed to her “premenstrual irrationality”, there are also appearances from a “girly swot” and a woman who looks “like a lingerie model, only cleverer and, if anything, with bigger breasts”, it actually reads like it was written by a horny teenager rather than an Eton educated prime minister.
If anyone feel the need to rush out and buy this, it’s on Amazon for £7.49, however Fultons are selling 6 rolls of Andrex for £3 saving you £4.49.”
Source: Dan Lambert, Facebook
More Tory dirty tricks
“A Conservative parliamentary candidate has been asked to explain the addition of two swastikas to campaign placards which were apparently defaced in 2017, and were photographed at the time but did not feature any such Nazi insignia.
In June 2017, during that year’s election campaign, Simon Hart, the Conservative parliamentary candidate for Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire, who has represented the constituency since 2010, uploaded a photograph to Twitter of one of his campaign placards.
It appeared to have been vandalised so that after the words “Simon Hart” a scrawled message in black marker pen added: “WILL STARVE YOUR NAN AND STEAL HER HOUSE!”
The image generated some sympathy for Mr Hart, and was used in a subsequent article published by WalesOnline, about the abuse MPs including Mr Hart suffered during the election.
Local press claim Mr Hart has used the incident as a campaigning platform since 2017. …”
“Boris Johnson has threatened Channel 4 over his own absolute moral cowardice”
It seems a trip to Dart’s Farm (where he was today) was more important than the global climate emergency!
“We are too far down the rabbit hole now to even know if a line has been drawn. There are so many lines now it is as if all our little lives have been tapped out and cut up with Michael Gove’s bank card.
So we can only repeat, as a statement of fact, that today was the day when the prime minister began threatening to shut down actual TV channels for the crime of his own complete moral cowardice.
It is impossible to say whether we have already gone this far before. But this is where we are.
Boris Johnson refused to take part in Channel 4’s “leaders debate” on the climate emergency, just as he has refused to be interviewed by the BBC’s Andrew Neil, and also refused even to be interviewed about whether or not he has refused the BBC’s Andrew Neil.
Where his podium should have been, Channel 4 placed a melting ice sculpture. The Conservative party sent Michael Gove in his place.
There is some uncertainty over who refused to allow Michael Gove to take part. Was it Channel 4 themselves? Was it the other party leaders? Given the other party leaders have done interviews with Andrew Neil, and Boris Johnson is refusing, they can hardly be blamed for not being the enablers to Boris Johnson’s utter shamelessness for a second time.
Gove, naturally, has responded by telling Jeremy Corbyn he’s scared. A good time to remember Michael Gove, who is less a human being and more just the Oxford Union accidentally made flesh, also likes to claim that the referendum was all about making the UK more welcoming to immigrants.
Still, the actual grownups over at the Conservative Central Office have responded by launching a formal complaint with Ofcom, and threatening to have Channel 4’s public broadcasting licence revoked.
This is the country we are now.
Who knows, perhaps, once we’ve “taken back control of our own laws”, other people being sanctioned entirely for Boris Johnson’s own failings will be the standard run of things.
“Prime minister, we’ve had one of the mothers on the phone again. Says it’s your daughter’s birthday. You’ve forgotten. Again.”
“Whoops. Righto. What shall we give her? Custodial or will 100 hours’ community service do?”
Arguably, it was going this way three and a half years ago, when Dominic Cummings threatened ITV with legal action over including Nigel Farage in their EU referendum debate show, telling them there would be “consequences”.
There were, inevitably, no consequences for ITV. Dominic Cummings made a tit of himself, but see also proroguing parliament, the Supreme Court case, refusing to send the withdrawal letter – when a tit makes a tit of itself, there are no consequences either. It is already a tit.
By the time of the second advertising break, a puddle had begun to gather on the floor beneath the Boris Johnson ice sculpture. I am reliably informed the Boris Johnson ice sculpture has already prepared court documents to suppress the puddle’s existence.
By virtue of his own non-attendance, Boris Johnson had created quite literally the exact kind of mess he had himself shown incapable of clearing up from the floor of a flooded optician’s just three weeks ago.
So there you have it. Create a mess that you can’t clear up then blame someone else. Whatever else goes wrong, the metaphors can always be relied upon to write themselves.”
“Boris Johnson Called Children Of Single Mothers ‘Ill-Raised, Ignorant, Aggressive And Illegitimate’ “
Would this apply to his mistress who had a daughter by him? Maybe not as she was married to someone else at the time and married someone else later!
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/drugs-love-child-affairs-new-18349295
“Single mothers were deemed “uppity and irresponsible” and working class men “feckless and hopeless” in a column which has now resurfaced. …”
“The billionaire and the 219 tiny flats: a new low for rabbit-hutch Britain?”
“Campaigners have piled in to criticise plans drawn up by a billionaire property tycoon to cram more than 200 tiny flats into an office building in north London. They describe it as a “human warehouse” that would be filled with people living in “cramped single-occupancy shoeboxes” like “rabbits in hutches”.
Amid claims that some of the planned flats would be as small as 15 sq metres – that’s less than 13ft by 13ft for residents’ entire living space – some locals say the proposal is one of the most shocking examples yet of the phenomenon known as office-to-residential conversion. A typical Premier Inn hotel room is 21 sq metres, while national space standards state that the minimum floor area for a new one-bedroom one-person home is 37 sq metres.
It was 10 years ago that, while London mayor, Boris Johnson pledged an end to “hobbit” homes in the capital, but examples of rabbit-hutch developments keep coming, and one leading architect told Guardian Money: “We’re heading towards the so-called ‘coffin homes’ in Hong Kong.” …”
“Boris Johnson’s Conservative party has received a surge in cash from Russian donors”
“… An OpenDemocracy investigation found that the UK Conservative party received at least £498,850 from Russian business people and their associates between November 2018 and October 2019.
This was a significant increase on the previous year when they received donations amounting to less than £350,000.
It comes despite increased pressure on the party to cut its ties to Russian oligarchs since the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury last year.
It also comes as Johnson’s chief strategist Dominic Cummings came under the spotlight for alleged Russian ties, after the Sunday Times reported claims from a whistleblower about “serious concerns” about the time he spent in Russia in the 1990s. …”
How company debt (and greed and tax avoidance) will sink us all
“Corporate addition to high debt threatens to destabilise the world economy. Not my words – those of the International Monetary Fund.
A recent report by the IMF says that “in a material economic slowdown scenario, half as severe as the global financial crisis, corporate debt-at-risk could rise to $19 trillion —or nearly 40 percent of total corporate debt in major economies—above [2008] crisis levels.”
In other words, in an economic slowdown, many firms will be unable to cover even their interest expenses with their earnings. Countries most at risk are US, China, Japan, Germany, Britain, France, Italy and Spain.
One study estimated that in 2018 UK s FTSE 100 companies alone had debt of £406bn.
Sinking in debt
Low interest rates have persuaded companies to pile-up debt in the belief that they will be able to use it to maximise shareholder returns. The key to this is tax relief on interest payments.
Ordinary folk don’t get tax relief on interest payments for mortgages or anything else because successive governments argued that such reliefs distort markets and encourage irresponsible behaviour.
However, corporations get tax relief on all interest payments. Currently for every £100 of interest payment, companies get tax relief of 19%, the prevailing rate of corporation tax, which reduces the net cost to £81. The tax subsidy enables companies to report higher profits.
Companies do not necessarily use debt to finance investment in productive assets. The UK languishes near the bottom of the major advanced economies league table for investment in productive assets and also lags in research and development expenditure.
British companies appease stock markets by paying almost the highest proportion of their earnings as dividends. BHS famously borrowed £1 billion to pay a dividend of £1.3bn. Carillion used its debt to finance executive pay and dividends. Thomas Cook had at least £1.7bn of debt but that did not stop lavish executive pay and bonuses.
Fatal effects
Corporate debt facilitates profiteering and tax avoidance. Water companies have long used ‘intragroup debt‘ to dodge taxes. Typically, they borrow money from an affiliate in a low/no tax jurisdiction. The UK-based company pays interest which qualifies for tax relief and reduces the UK tax liability.
Many a tax haven either does not levy corporation tax or exempts foreign profits from its tax regime. As a result, the affiliate receives the interest payment tax free.
It is important to note that the company is effectively paying interest to another member of the group and no cash leaves the group. The inclusion of interest payments in the paying company’s cost base can also enable it to push up charges to customers, especially if has monopoly rights on supply of goods and services.
Thames Water is an interesting example here. From 2006 to 2017, it was owned by Macquarie Bank and operated through a labyrinth of companies, with some registered in Caymans.
During the period, Thames’ debt increased from £2.4bn to £10bn, mostly from tax haven affiliates, and interest payments swelled the charges for customers. Macquarie and its investors made returns of between 15.5% and 19% a year.
For the period 2007 to 2015, the company’s accounts show that it paid £3.186bn in interest to other entities in the group alone. Tax relief on interest payments reduced UK corporate tax liability. For the years 2007-2016, Thames Water paid about £100,000 in corporation tax.
Private equity entities use debt to secure control of companies and engage in asset-stripping. A good example is the demise of Bernard Mathews, a poultry company.
In 2013, Rutland Partners acquired the company and loaded it with debt, which carried an interest rate of 20%. This debt was secured which meant that in the event of bankruptcy Rutland and its backers would be paid before unsecured creditors.
In 2016, Bernard Matthews’ directors, appointed by Rutland, decided that the business was no longer viable and sought to sell it. However, they only sold the assets of the company which realised enough to pay secured creditors, Rutland and banks.
The big losers were unsecured creditors, which included employee pension scheme, HMRC and suppliers. The purchaser of the assets told the House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee that it offered to buy the whole company, including its liabilities, but the offer was declined by Rutland because by dumping liabilities it collected a higher amount.
What needs to change
There is some recognition that corporate addiction to debt poses a threat to the economy. Following recommendations by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the UK has placed some restrictions on the tax relief for interest payments, but that is not enough.
An independent enforcer of company law is needed to ensure that companies maintain adequate capital. Companies need workers on boards to ensure that directors do not squander corporate resources on unwarranted dividends and executive pay.
The insolvency laws need to be reformed to ensure that secured creditors can’t walk away with almost all of the proceeds from the sale of assets and dump liabilities.
And finally, tax relief on debt needs to be abolished altogether.”
https://leftfootforward.org/2019/10/prem-sikka-how-companies-use-debt-to-line-their-pockets/
The Great Help-to-Buy ripoff
“Building chiefs cash in on Help to Buy”
Bosses at Persimmon, Barratt and Bellway have been handed shares worth more than £12million.
Persimmon chief executive David Jenkinson exercised share options worth £10million under the housebuilder’s controversial bonus scheme, while two top Barratt executives received stock worth nearly £1million, and two Bellway bosses were handed performance-linked shares worth £1.6million.
The bonanza came just a day after Tony Pidgley, the founder and chairman of rival builder Berkeley, sold shares worth £42million.
His deal took the amount he has made from selling stock in the past two and half years to £166m.
Last night critics condemned the share awards, which came just a week after figures showed the rate of house building in the UK had hit a three-year low.
Developers such as Persimmon, Barratt and Bellway – but less so Berkeley – have also raked in record profits off the back of Help to Buy, a taxpayer-funded scheme that lends cash to buyers.
Reuben Young, a spokesman for housing campaign group Priced Out, said: ‘The scandal is these payouts are only made possible by Help to Buy, which has taken developer profits into the stratosphere by investing public money into rising house prices.’
Persimmon’s Jenkinson, 52, received 411,084 shares worth £9.7million at yesterday’s prices. After taxes he received 217,874 shares worth £5.2million and he is required to hold on to them for at last one year.
Barratt chief executive David Thomas received 64,182 shares worth £431,000 through a bonus plan and deputy chief Steven Boyes received 50,795 worth £341,000.
Bellway awarded 30,667 performance-linked shares worth about £1million to boss Jason Honeyman and 17,823 shares worth about £600,000 to finance chief Keith Adey.
The final amount of shares they receive will depend on whether they hit performance targets.
Meanwhile, Pidgley has sold shares in the past six months that have made him £79.2million.
That included 1m he sold in July for £37.2million and a further 1m on Tuesday for £42million, cashing in on his company’s rising share price.
The sales came after Pidgley previously sold a total of 2.5m shares for £86.8million in 2017 – taking the amount he has made since then to a staggering £166million.
The building firms declined to comment.
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-7585531/Building-chiefs-cash-Help-Buy.html
“Requiring voter ID in British elections suggests the government is adopting US ‘voter suppression’ tactics”
“This week’s Queen’s Speech revived proposals to introduce photographic ID requirements for voting in British elections. The Democratic Audit team assess the available evidence on the likely consequence of such a measure, and consider whether the legislation tackles the right priorities for improving our elections on which there is consensus, or suggests moves to enhance Tory election chances via excluding voters presumed unfavourable to them….”
Tory donors can, and do, control Prime Ministers
“Two former Conservative prime ministers lobbied a Middle Eastern royal family to award a multi-billion dollar oil contract to a company headed by a major Tory donor, the Guardian has established.
In March 2017, while in Downing Street, Theresa May wrote to the Bahraini prime minister to support the oil firm Petrofac while it was bidding to win the contract from the Gulf state.
Two months earlier, and just six months after stepping down as prime minister, David Cameron promoted the company during a two-day visit to Bahrain where he met the state’s crown prince.
Cameron was flown back to Britain on a plane belonging to Ayman Asfari, Petrofac’s co-founder, chief executive and largest shareholder. Petrofac did not ultimately win the contract.
Asfari and his wife, Sawsan, have donated almost £800,000 to the Conservative party since 2009. The donations were made in a personal capacity.
Documents obtained by the Guardian raise questions about how governments should best manage the perceived potential conflicts of interest generated by donations from business figures to political parties.
The government said it was routine for ministers to support British businesses bidding for major foreign contracts. Petrofac said official support had been obtained through entirely proper channels.
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has been investigating Petrofac over suspected bribery, corruption and money laundering for at least two years. …”
[Broadclyst] “Parish council with £2,500 in reserves for grass seed will not reduce council tax after bid to cap it fails”
“Broadclyst parish councillor Karl Straw saw his motion to reduce the authority’s precept from £233.83 to no more than £160 per Band D household, be rejected by six votes to two.
Parish council chairman Henry Massey said the authority could not vote to ‘arbitrarily’ slash its precept by one-third, as it would immediately see funding dry up for some services.
Cllr Massey said the population of Broadclyst has increased from 1,000 people to 8,000 people in the last ten years, and the parish council provides services other parish authorities do not.
The vote, taken at Victory Hall on October 7, means Broadclyst remains the fourth most expensive non-unitary parish in the country, and the second most expensive precepting parish in Devon.
Cranbrook is the most expensive precepting parish, due to the maintenance bill for its country park.
Cllr Straw said Broadclyst Parish Council’s precept has ballooned by more than 66 per cent in the last five years.
He said: “Broadclyst pays on average £233.83 against the Devon average of £42.20.
“Seaton pays £101.60, Axminster pays £88.64, Sidmouth pays £72.36, Honiton pays £71.08, Exmouth pays £60, and Ottery pays £49.03
“The average East Devon parish charge is £46.55 and in Devon the parishes charge on average is £42.20.
“My motion was to reduce the precept by at least £75 in 2020/21 and to introduce a policy of continued reductions until the parish as charging no more than the average across Devon.”
Broadclyst Parish Council currently has £2,500 reserved for grass seeds for its bowling green.
However, Cllr Massey said nothing has been spent on grass seeds this year, and the figure would only be spent in full in a worst-case scenario.
Cllr Massey said Broadclyst has grown significantly from a ‘relatively small size’ since 2009.
He said: “We have to balance the needs of the people and groups who use the village as well as at the same time ensuring that we are giving good value for money.
“We provide a huge number of services for a parish council and, due to cutbacks in district and county council, have taken on additional services that otherwise would not be provided.”
Cllr Massey said the council welcomes the input made from Cllr Straw and will be carefully examining its budget in the next two months.
Cllr Straw said he is planning to request the council set up a people’s forum, which will invite residents to discuss what precept they would like to see the authority operate with.”
https://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/broadclyst-precept-motion-outcome-1-6318881
Persimmon in the deep, deep manure yet again on leasehold houses
“Persimmon is heading for a bitter showdown with families who claim the housebuilder mis-sold them homes on toxic leasehold deals.
Hundreds of its customers bought leasehold houses and now claim they are trapped by ratcheting rent bills that have made it impossible to sell.
But the company, which is the UK’s most profitable developer, is playing hardball and has told desperate customers that it ‘does not accept’ their complaints.
Along with other developers, Persimmon has been banned from selling leasehold houses after a public outcry.
Persimmon and others were accused of charging extortionate ground rents, some of which rose dramatically over time, along with a raft of hidden charges.
Leaseholders effectively buy the right to live in a property for an agreed period, rather than ownership of it outright.
However, an inquiry by MPs earlier this year found that many leaseholders did not appear to have fully understood the deal.
In a recent row with Cardiff council, Persimmon was accused of mis-selling leasehold homes. It offered residents the freeholds to their properties at no charge as part of an out-of-court settlement.
Campaigners now argue all its leasehold customers across the country should receive similar compensation.
But in a letter sent to customers and seen by the Mail, the company rejected claims householders were misled.
It claimed staff would have explained the terms of the homes to customers during the sales process, that their solicitor should have advised them about it and that mortgage lenders would have also assessed the property at the time.
A separate survey by the Solicitors Regulation Authority also found one fifth of people sold leasehold properties were not even told the difference between leasehold and freehold homes.
MPs called for an investigation into possible mis-selling. They lambasted solicitors for being too cosy with developers and failing to warn clients about the rip-off deals.
Following their report, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) launched a probe.
Sir Gary Streeter, Tory MP for South West Devon, accused the firm of telling ‘blatant’ lies to leaseholders in Plymouth, part of his constituency, during the sales process.
A Persimmon spokesman insisted the decision to ‘gift’ ownership to leaseholders in Cardiff was ‘not to do with the mis-selling of leasehold properties’, adding: ‘We firmly dispute the fact that the customers were not aware the properties were being sold on a leasehold basis.
Any suggestion that the decision by Persimmon to gift the freeholds was in relation to mis-selling of leaseholds is false and misleading.’
‘All customers buying leasehold properties are informed by the sales team at the time of purchase that the properties are leasehold and not freehold.’
‘It feels like we have been tricked’
Grandparents Noelle and Alf Lutton bought their five-bedroom home three years ago for £250,000 – but they have still been asking for problems to be fixed
Noelle and Alf Lutton claim the punitive terms of their leasehold home were not made clear to them by Persimmon.
The grandparents bought their five-bedroom home three years ago for £250,000 – but they have still been asking for problems to be fixed.
In addition, they face having to pay £150 in ground rent every year – a rate that increases every decade – and must fork out so-called ‘permission fees’ of £250 if they want to make even minor changes to the property.
They claim they were never told they would have to pay these charges. Former customer services worker Mrs Lutton, 75, says the couple had always previously lived in freehold properties but were not given that option when buying their current home in Market Deeping, near Peterborough.
Instead, they say a Persimmon sales representative verbally promised they could buy the freehold for ‘a couple of hundred pounds’ two years after the initial sale.
But Persimmon later quoted them a price of £3,750. And although it later reduced this to £500, the company insists they would still have to pay permission fees even if they now acquired the freehold.
‘Had we known then what we know now, we would never have bought the property,’ Mrs Lutton said. ‘We weren’t told about any of the fees we would have to pay. It feels like we have been tricked.’
A Persimmon spokesman said: ‘The details of the ground rent, associated fees and covenants were included within the contract and documentation at the time of purchase.
‘Following completion, Mr and Mrs Lutton raised a number of snagging issues with their property. The last one of these is due to be addressed shortly.’ “
“Boris Johnson Has Handed £100,000 Of Taxpayers’ Cash To One Of His Main Donors”
“Boris Johnson’s government has awarded £100,000 of taxpayers’ money to a company that donated to his leadership campaign in order to help it “prepare for Brexit” — despite the firm having already declared itself “Brexit ready”.
Bristol port will receive the six-figure payment to “help their preparations for Brexit on 31 October”, the Department for Transport told BuzzFeed News. It is one of 16 ports across the UK that has received a share of a £10 million funding pot, and the only one in the west of England.
The decision to hand Bristol port a large sum of taxpayer cash will raise conflict-of-interest questions, because just four months ago the Bristol Port Company made a £25,000 donation directly to Johnson ahead of the Conservative party leadership contest.
Johnson then stoked controversy when he endorsed a report calling for a Singapore-style tax-free port at Bristol during his campaign.
The payment will also raise eyebrows because, despite Transport secretary Grant Shapps saying the money is about “ensuring they are ready for Brexit”, the Bristol Port Company has previously insisted it is already “ready” for the UK to come out of the EU. …”
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/boris-johnson-bristol-port-cash
The curious case of the missing houses
Many council officers are honourable, many are not. Owl had hoped to to write “most officers are honourable, a few are not” but that hasn’t been Owl’s experience, sadly.
Now, all eyes are on a planning application in Salcombe, for two houses in an exceptionally good location were deleted from plans shown to a “planning workshop” for councillors.
Why? That old chestnut “commercial confidentiallity”.
“A council has been forced to reveal plans for two luxury homes on a beauty spot which were withheld from councillors during a meeting.
Above: original plan and plan shown to councillors and plans shown to councillors
South Hams District Council in Devon cited “commercial confidentiality” in keeping the Salcombe plans under wraps, but a watchdog rejected that excuse.
Environment group South Hams Society urged “more transparency in planning matters” by the council.
The authority said it “did not want the meeting to be sidetracked”.
Drawings of the homes had formed part of draft plans for the hill-top development off Shadycombe Road in the seaside town.
But a council officer told architects in an email on 11 October last year that “at this point” the scale of the four-bed detached houses should be left out of the plans.
He said the scale “concerns me” and added: “It would be a mistake to present this detail.”
In an email response, the architect sent back revised plans with circles instead of drawings of the houses “without being too prescriptive on their size and design”.
The email:
The revised plans were then put before a planning workshop of councillors and local businesses on 17 October.
The council initially refused South Hams Society’s request to reveal the original plans.
However, it appealed and the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) ordered the authority to divulge the omitted details.
In a statement, the council said it had “sought legal advice” and “we were of the view that we were entitled to withhold them”.
“It was clear to us that the plans as they were, would not be recommended for approval by the council.
“We felt that the size of the properties on the plan were inappropriate.”
The workshop had been arranged to talk to key stakeholders about a masterplan for the whole area and we did not want the meeting to be side-tracked by a proposal which we were sure would never come forward in its current state.”
It added it now “fully respects” the demand to release the full plans.”
Above: plans presented to workshop
Didi Alayli, chair of the society, said she hoped the ICO ruling “will lead to real change” in how council planners deal with draft plans.
“The huge profits to be made by landowners and developers in our beautiful area make it all the more important that our planning system is fit for purpose and we are not there yet,” she said.
It is understood landowner Jason Smith, who has not yet responded to a BBC request for comment, has not taken the proposals forward.”
“Persimmon faces wave of claims that it mis-sold properties with toxic leaseholds”
“Britain’s most profitable housebuilder faces a flood of claims that it mis-sold toxic leasehold properties.
Persimmon made ‘deliberate misrepresentations’ when selling homes on leases, MPs and families say.
They are calling on the developer, which made a £1.1billion profit last year and handed former boss Jeff Fairburn a bonus of £75million, to surrender full ownership of the properties to compensate buyers said to have been misled.
The demands erupted after Persimmon backed down in a court battle over allegations of mis-selling.
In an out-of-court settlement reached last month with Cardiff council, Persimmon agreed to give leaseholders in the St Edeyrns development outright ownership of their properties as a ‘goodwill gesture’.
The defeat has been seized on by campaigners, who say leaseholders across the UK should get similar compensation.
And it comes as the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) probes claims that housebuilders may have mis-sold leases.
Katie Kendrick, of the National Leasehold Campaign, said: ‘We are hopeful that the CMA and others can now use this example to build a future mis-selling case on behalf of leaseholders.’
A lease grants the right to live in a property for an agreed period, not ownership of it outright. Leaseholders can face extortionate ground rents and fees to make small changes.
The Cardiff case has led leaseholders in Plymouth and Cheltenham to demand they get similar treatment.
Sir Gary Streeter, Tory MP for South West Devon, has warned Persimmon that he will report it to trading standards, complain to ministers and shame it in Parliament if it does not agree.
Persimmon has so far rejected suggestions it should offer similar deals.
A spokesman last night said of the Cardiff case: ‘We firmly dispute the fact that the customers were not aware the properties were being sold on a leasehold basis.’ “
“Private Eye” calls out EDDC CEO Mark Williams over Sidford Business Park advice to developer
Source: Private Eye 1505 published today
East Devon Watch 