Venger Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 5 hours ago, Tapori said: HMRC and the Treasury had to Regulate: -Intro. "We Regulate any stealing of his property." And that line in that song-track was extracted from the movie Young Guns. Some Young Guns coming through and into positions of power in HMRC & HM Treasury, I suspect. And they are.... top level power. Really.... HM Treasury /HMRC are not tenants to be bossed around, told what is 'true', demand answers you want to hear from, or to treated with any contempt or disrespect.. They are top level serious people doing serious work, with power. Quote Dr Rosalind Beck says 27/04/2017 at 13:33 ...Thank you for your correspondence dated 10 April about restricting finance costs for landlords. As it is not practical for Ministers to respond to all the letters they receive, I have been asked to reply on their behalf. I appreciate the time and effort that you have put into the correspondence with HM Treasury and other Government departments. However, previous responses to you have fully outlined the rationale for this tax change. There is nothing further to add to the previous responses to you and therefore, we consider this matter now closed. Yours sincerely, --------------- Correspondence and Information Rights Team The Treasury NB. The seem to think they have the power to suggest the matter is closed. It most certainly isn’t! We’ll badger and hound them relentlessly until this insane policy is reversed. Quote Dr Rosalind Beck says: 27/04/2017 at 15:55 I am thinking of trying to raise a complaint at their unwillingness to answer legitimate questions. 4 hours ago, Phil321 said: Being ignored or considered a nuisance would be her best case scenario. Bearing in mind who she is dealing with and even with the cleanest of tax affairs....HMRC is a sleeping lion best left alone rather than being prodded by a stick by an annoying child. It's not like writing to your bank or your local supermarket, where you can rant and call them stupid in an irrational and entitled manner then take your business elsewhere if they don't conform. This is HMRC. Whilst I am sure HMRC wouldn't be vindictive or unprofessional and target the author through spite....but if you keep prodding the lion and soon enough the lion will become alerted to your presence. Whilst the lion may not tear you apart....the very best you can hope for is to be ignored. I know her blood it literally boiling but someone near her needs to have a word. Maybe a 118'er will let her know that ranting at HMRC might not be a good idea. Surely they can't all be so deluded....but as the 118 thread gloriously developed over the past 2 years...maybe they are. Increasingly I just love S24. Very very much so, Phil321. I am absolutely clean as anything when it comes to my financial affairs and tax-matters. However I still treat HM Treasury/HMRC like those agents from The Matrix. I just want to live within the system, pay what I owe, and not have to be in any position which requires indepth correspondence/disagreement with them. Quote It can't be over that quickly, can it? Hiding in the darkness, the drone suspected it was already too late. It was supposed to wait until the attack had reached a plateau phase and the aggressor thought that it was just a matter of mopping up the last dregs of opposition before it made its move, but the attack had been too sudden, too extreme, too capable. The plans the ship had made, of which it was such an important part, could only anticipate so much, only allow for so proportionally greater a technical capability on the part of the attacker. Beyond a certain point, there was simply nothing you could do; there was no brilliant plan you could draw up or cunning stratagem you could employ that would not seem laughably simple and unsophisticated to a profoundly more developed enemy. -Excession Quote ~ I am on my way. Do not let the ship come within a light week of the store itself, Commander. I know how it will think if it is attacked; this is not some genteel Orbital Mind or a nicely timorous General Contact Unit; this is a Culture warship showing every sign of being fully armed and ready to press matters. 'What, creeping in as it is?' the Commander sneered. ~ Commander, you would be amazed and appalled at how few bright sides there are concerning the appearance and behaviour of a warship like this. The fact it's not charging in through the defence screen and metaphorically skidding to a stop is almost certainly a bad sign; it probably means it's one of the wily ones. -Excession Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnglishinWales Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 Looking forward to their march on parliament. LOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venger Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, Phil321 said: Being ignored or considered a nuisance would be her best case scenario. Bearing in mind who she is dealing with and even with the cleanest of tax affairs....HMRC is a sleeping lion best left alone rather than being prodded by a stick by an annoying child. It's not like writing to your bank or your local supermarket, where you can rant and call them stupid in an irrational and entitled manner then take your business elsewhere if they don't conform. This is HMRC. Whilst I am sure HMRC wouldn't be vindictive or unprofessional and target the author through spite....but if you keep prodding the lion and soon enough the lion will become alerted to your presence. Whilst the lion may not tear you apart....the very best you can hope for is to be ignored. I know her blood it literally boiling but someone near her needs to have a word. Maybe a 118'er will let her know that ranting at HMRC might not be a good idea. Surely they can't all be so deluded....but as the 118 thread gloriously developed over the past 2 years...maybe they are. Increasingly I just love S24. That is what makes it all so fascinating, astonishing, shocking and depressing. The attitude and reality outlook so many of the individual BTLers. I have not seen any sign of anyone on PovertyLater pulling back from full-on letters to authority. They get narky at responses of politicians who refuse to be cowed (about their all-important-vote).. BTLers 'providing homes' and human shield positioning re Section 24. BTW here was the another instance a couple of weeks ago and top level response.... (Dross Bosher). Quote April 2017 Our reference: .... ...... Thank you for your correspondence dated 23 February to the Minister of State for Housing, Planning and London about the changes to the taxation of landlords. As it is not practical for Ministers to respond to all the letters they receive, I have been asked to reply on their behalf. I am aware that you have received several letters from HM Treasury officials and Ministers on the restriction of finance costs tax relief for landlords, and I am afraid I cannot add much more to the previous responses as the Government’s position on the policy remains unchanged. However, I will try to address the further specific points you have made.... ...With regards to the Chancellor’s comments to your colleague. I can assure you that he fully understands this policy, including the impacts on landlords and the wider housing market. Thank you for taking the time to make us aware of your further concerns. ^ h/t @Dyson Fury 10 April 17 source HM Treasury/HMRC and many others in authority have been taking their letters since 2015....... Look at what how one of the biggest BTLers (BTLer/LL for 20+ years, multiple properties, and 'expert') responded after Section24. Who do you/they think you are!!!!? Quote 08/07/2015 Fantastic idea Simon. I have played with your words slightly and sent him the following email …. Subject: Unfair tax on landlords Dear Mr Osbourne Today you took the fundamental basics of business “Business profit = Income – Running costs” and you destroyed it, along with any trust or credibility that you had. BTL mortgage interest costs are a straight forward cost of running a business, as is rent, rates etc. You are now planning to collect tax on money spent, not a tax on profit. This is past ridiculous. This needs undoing and quickly – have you lost your mind? https://www.property118.com/budget-2015-landlords-reactions/76164/comment-page-6/#comment-57752 It is the astonishing reality-gap misunderstanding..... they do not seem to recognise who they are dealing with. And they are full of demand/me. Another multi-BTLer who fronted the attempt to get a Judicial Review has also been writing some astonishing letters to the authorities..... as though he really matters so much, and believes he really knows so much more.... 'providing homes'. Rust from True Detective is great... (including in scene below which covers a lot of it), but his overall theory is only half right, and heavily influenced by all the bad he has seen. So many individuals in society are not too self-aware (his theory)... but simply not aware enough. (h/t Neverwhere). Lacking in empathy for others. Only seeing their own narrow world-views. Only dimly aware that other people have full dimensional lives, with their own important dreams and ambitions. And it all impacts hard, when those on the tilt of power see it all one way (their way.... all the houses for me, renting for you.... HPI+ celebration), to extremes. Not safe for work / swearing / bad language One main reason many BTLers are in shock and vulnerable to Section24, and other power moves against BTL. Quote I'm saying, "This is societally destructive unsustainable idiocy and I refuse to be complicit by an act of commission". I can't stop some herbert like Mark ganging up with a shit bank and using my earnings to pay a BTL mortgage but I can chose not to hand over my savings and sign up for a whacking great repayment mortgage. The fundamental error in the BTLers reasoning about us is that they are true believers in themselves. They are failing to understand that an alternative perspective on them is consistent with the facts. Amoral chancers disrupting other people's lives by making a daft and unsustainable pact with a bunch of banks that are so crap that they put themselves out of business. It just shines through in entry after entry. (including in screenie taken below recently) And of course, even before Section 24.... it was there just as obvious as it is now. I don't know how some BTLers can even go around and live with themselves, having claims on multiple houses, but they find a way to sell it to themselves. All too often they don't want to ask themselves the question....'What does this say about me?' (Although a few have and are reforming... they recognise just why they did it.. the real reasons... profit). Not as a sociatelly do-good. And we have BTLers in denial, coming to HPC threads and claiming 'Gov encouraged them to do BTL'..... having bought up property after property for 15 years !!!!!! They are not able to have an introspection, when it was all about the mad-gainz. (Same guy told about his need for big big big pension with multiple homes BTL.) On 4/10/2017 at 3:27 PM, Pumpkin Muad'Dib said: Just saw this in all its glory on the website in question. Let's see what that should have said... IMO, too many BTL minds have been living a reality in the Land of Infinite Fun... all-about-me. To the extent where they believe it the reality for them, and people of no consequence carry the heavy stuff. And it was similar into Bubble 1.0 for millions of others. ForeverHPI. Debt without worry. Quote There was only one problem with the Land of Infinite Fun, and that was that if you ever did lose yourself in it completely, you could forget that there was a base reality at all. In a way, this didn't really matter, as long as there was somebody back where you came from minding the hearth. The problem came when there was nobody left or inclined to tend the fire, mind the store, look after the housekeeping (or however you wanted to express it), or if somebody or something else - somebody or something from outside, the sort of entity that came under the general heading of an Outside Context Problem, for example - decided they wanted to meddle with the fire in that hearth, the stock in the store, the contents and running of the house; if you'd spent all your time having Fun, with no way back to reality, or just no idea what to do to protect yourself when you did get back there, then you were vulnerable. In fact, you were probably dead, or enslaved. It didn't matter that base reality was petty and grey and mean and demeaning and quite empty of meaning compared to the glorious majesty of the multi-hued life you'd been living in Infinite Fun; it didn't matter that base reality was of no consequence aesthetically or hedonistically; if that was the single foundation-stone that all your higher-level comfort and joy rested upon, and it was kicked away from underneath you, you fell, and your limitless pleasure realms fell with you. Edited April 28, 2017 by Venger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venger Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 Quote ....In the letter to you dated 8 February, it was explained that, as property income is derived from a landlord’s interest in the land, rather from the services they provide, property income is considered to be an investment, rather than a trade, for tax purposes. For this reason, property income is not taxed in the same way as income from a trade. With regards to the Chancellor’s comments to your colleague. I can assure you that he fully understands this policy, including the impacts on landlords and the wider housing market. Thank you for taking the time to make us aware of your further concerns. We will keep this policy under review, as we do with all tax policy. Yours sincerely, ------ ------------ Personal Taxation HM Treasury https://www.property118.com/property118-campaign-team-demolish-treasurys-ill-conceived-arguments/97367/ Quote Dr Rosalind Beck says 27/04/2017 at 13:33 ...Thank you for your correspondence dated 10 April about restricting finance costs for landlords. As it is not practical for Ministers to respond to all the letters they receive, I have been asked to reply on their behalf. I appreciate the time and effort that you have put into the correspondence with HM Treasury and other Government departments. However, previous responses to you have fully outlined the rationale for this tax change. There is nothing further to add to the previous responses to you and therefore, we consider this matter now closed. Yours sincerely, --------------- Correspondence and Information Rights Team The Treasury NB. The seem to think they have the power to suggest the matter is closed. It most certainly isn’t! We’ll badger and hound them relentlessly until this insane policy is reversed. Does she/they really expect HM Treasury to answer all the follow up ramble of questions? Riddled with entitlement and negative projection. (IMO) Quote As we say, we would appreciate your answering these points, sticking to our numbering. You wouldn’t like to be accused of evading any particular point as it might then be deduced that you have no rational answer to it. As we are not politicians or game players and thankfully don’t have to engage in the outright dishonesty we observe emanating from the political system of which you are a part (this is not honourable work), we will add that this outrageous policy against the PRS – attacking landlords and tenants equally – with landlords certainly not just taking the hit, as the Treasury implies – will be overturned at some point, so it would be better for all concerned if it were sooner rather than later. We therefore urge you to pass this correspondence up to the highest level and inform us regarding to whom you have referred it. This is a matter of such national importance that it should be being dealt with at the highest level, rather than the powers that be sitting back and waiting to see how bad it gets before they act. We also respectfully suggest that now is the time that we landlords had an audience at the Treasury – that is the least that should happen – so perhaps you can also pass this on as a formal request from the landlords at Property118 to meet with the Chancellor? Many on the other side of the highly-leveraged multi-property BTLers' equation know about BTLers' meaning of 'natural justice'. "All the houses for me, and all your rent to me, 'providing homes' that I was not in competition with anyone for in buying." You want it to be one way, but its the other way. (The Wire). Rules can be tweaked and reliefs cut. Power. Not all about BTLers and their multiple debt claims on property. You could have all practised caution, or chose different, including into far more productive enterprises.... without the certainty of other people 'needing homes' for your magnificent risks. Other people exist. Quote You further state that “For this reason, property income is not taxed in the same way as income from a trade.” This is not true. HMRC’s manual states that: “The profits of a rental business are calculated in the same way as the profits of a trade.” http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/Manuals/pimmanual/PIM1103.htm This has been the case since April 1999. 'Calculated' but subject to future changes, including changes to tax-relief. (IMO). Can only look to themselves if they believed tax-relief conditions were permanent. Spend a few hours reading general history. The world does not revolve around you. Time and time again people have had to learn this lesson, in rebalance and to clear out the entitlement... the all-about-me. On 11/16/2014 at 2:51 PM, Venger said: There is much evidence that human expectations tend to be linear. Most of the time, most people expect current conditions to continue for the indefinite future. Wherever prosperity exists, it is natural for people to expect prosperity to continue. For this reason, much of the history of human society is a record of astonishment. Time and again, people have marginalised their affairs, rendering themselves increasingly crisis-prone. They have gone into debt, extending claims on resources to an extreme that could be supported only if current conditions were sustained uninterrupted into the future. Time and again these hopes have been disappointed. Anyway... this today. Quote 28/04/2017 at 17:43 Just sent this: Dear Ms Patel. I find the unwillingness of the Treasury representatives to answer my legitimate questions completely unsatisfactory. Can you please forward me the details of the process to be followed to make a formal complaint? All the best. Dr Beck https://www.property118.com/property118-campaign-team-demolish-treasurys-ill-conceived-arguments/97367/comment-page-5/#comment-90099 HM Treasury has really indulged them... to think of making a complaint?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtickle Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 11 minutes ago, Venger said: Anyway... this today. https://www.property118.com/property118-campaign-team-demolish-treasurys-ill-conceived-arguments/97367/comment-page-5/#comment-90099 HM Treasury has really indulged them... to think of making a complaint?! Haven't posted much recently but really enjoying reading this Party Thread. I look forward to their counter-action, whatever it may be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtickle Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 On 27/04/2017 at 3:38 PM, Lambie said: Having drafted a number of replies for ministers, I can confirm this is civil service speak for "**** off and die in a fire". It's also likely that the minister themselves has personally directed not to engage with them any further, which is (or should be) extremely rare. I've only ever seen it used once. Even if they come up with a wizard argument in the next 6 weeks, all they will get back is "it's purdah, no comment". Wow. Ros is truly special then! Also special in that it hasn't seemed to sink in - she's just writing back and complaining that they won't indulge her any more. So this leads me to ask: is there another form of words that's civil service speak for "ok, we told you to **** off and die in a fire but you wouldn't listen. Write as much as you like, but we won't be replying to you, ever again". ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exiled Canadian Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 3 minutes ago, mrtickle said: Wow. Ros is truly special then! Also special in that it hasn't seemed to sink in - she's just writing back and complaining that they won't indulge her any more. So this leads me to ask: is there another form of words that's civil service speak for "ok, we told you to **** off and die in a fire but you wouldn't listen. Write as much as you like, but we won't be replying to you, ever again". ? I've used "The Board has noted and considered your comments." A couple of times Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverwhere Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 42 minutes ago, Venger said: Does she/they really expect HM Treasury to answer all the follow up ramble of questions? Riddled with entitlement and negative projection. (IMO) It's Gish Gallop and utterly mad. Quote The Gish Gallop (also known as proof by verbosity[1]) is the fallacious debate tactic of drowning your opponent in a flood of individually-weak arguments in order to prevent rebuttal of the whole argument collection without great effort. As with most trolling this tactic is primarily a play to the audience. It's resoundingly pointless if the person whose opinion the Galloper is intent on swaying is the same individual whose ability to respond they are trying to drown out with nonsense. Taken together with the frequent insults and denigrating remarks it speaks to a remarkable lack of interest in actually convincing anyone on the receiving end of such correspondence of anything at all. (h/t Pumpkin Muad'Dib for the gif ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pop321 Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 28/04/2017 at 17:43 Just sent this: Dear Ms Patel. I find the unwillingness of the Treasury representatives to answer my legitimate questions completely unsatisfactory. Can you please forward me the details of the process to be followed to make a formal complaint? All the best. Dr Beck ----------- 'All the best' super super comedy sign off. So it's a complaint that they are not agreeing with her. Think about that....it's not that her tax code is wrong, it's not that her tax calculation is wrong, it's not that they haven't adjusted a payment due.....it's that they don't agree with get shouty letters. Seriously she has gone crazy. Really deluded and picking a fight with the wrong government department. I genuinely and honestly believe she has done more for the HPC cause then anyone on these forums could have ever imagined possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bear Hug Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 2 hours ago, mrtickle said: Wow. Ros is truly special then! Also special in that it hasn't seemed to sink in - she's just writing back and complaining that they won't indulge her any more. So this leads me to ask: is there another form of words that's civil service speak for "ok, we told you to **** off and die in a fire but you wouldn't listen. Write as much as you like, but we won't be replying to you, ever again". ? We (and Dross Bosher) will find out soon what it is hopefully! What I like about here, is that if someone goes batshit crazy, it will at least be pointed out to them. On poverty 118 - anything goes, as long as it''s in line with S24 is wrong/cant' go wrong with bricks'n'mortar 2 minutes ago, Phil321 said: Seriously she has gone crazy. Really deluded and picking a fight with the wrong government department. I genuinely and honestly believe she has done more for the HPC cause then anyone on these forums could have ever imagined possible. It's hard to pick my favourite poverty 118 poster to thank for their pro-HPC efforts. So many excellent attempts to represent landlords as totally inhuman scumbags Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ah-so Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 Ros deserves her own thread. Her emails get longer and more random and the replies to them get shorter and more dismissive. What she had not done is sell or deleverage. Time for her to get out while the going is goodish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazypabs Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 Ros had kindly written a report for us all to realise exactly how deep she is in the brown stuff... For your pleasure... https://blog.upad.co.uk/blog/what-will-happen-to-rents-because-of-section-24-report-rosalind-beck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ah-so Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 2 hours ago, crazypabs said: Ros had kindly written a report for us all to realise exactly how deep she is in the brown stuff... For your pleasure... https://blog.upad.co.uk/blog/what-will-happen-to-rents-because-of-section-24-report-rosalind-beck "When they sell to an owner-occupier that property will be lost to the rental market. Less supply of rented housing is likely to lead to higher rents." With this demonstrably idiotic argument still doing the rounds, is there any point in ever engaging with them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyguy Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 8 minutes ago, Ah-so said: "When they sell to an owner-occupier that property will be lost to the rental market. Less supply of rented housing is likely to lead to higher rents." With this demonstrably idiotic argument still doing the rounds, is there any point in ever engaging with them? What about her poor daughter? The phd one who did not want to get into byl, vring lazy and stupid and all that. Bet the xmas meal will be fun this year. Still, she should enjoy whilst it lasts, Sally army hostels dont let you take booze in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btl_hater Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 There is also this lengthy piece from the esteemed academic: https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmpublic/finance/memo/fb06.htm Basically, she's screwed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toast Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 22 hours ago, Venger said: I have not seen any sign of anyone on PovertyLater pulling back from full-on letters to authority. Perhaps Rosalind Beck is not a great poster-child for the view I'm about to express here, but I'm actually happy she feels free to mouth off to the powers that be, because this should be true for all of us. It is an important principle of democracy that the institutions of government exist for, and are at the service of, "we the people". There should be no penalty for being rude, nor objecting the policies or behaviour of some authority, if someone feels they are being mistreated; and I think it is a mark of self-sufficiency and human dignity to object in just this way. Now, obviously, many (ideally all) of the politics and institutions of this land, such as the police, and (arguably) hmrc, exist by consent, in order to make sure we do not damage or exploit our fellow man, and that we contribute something to the fabric of our common society. In that case, it is of course right that the actions of the institution should not be influenced, one way or the other, by us being rude and objectionable - provided we do, if only under sufferance, comply. If I am arrested by a police officer, I believe I should be able to call him an ass without suffering for those words, but not that I should be able to resist arrest. In that sense, good for them that they are writing to politicians. Where my admiration for the letter-writing campaign falters, is the content of what they are trying to achieve. They have managed to make an independent living, without being pushed around by some boss in a company. I admire the quest for that freedom, and I can see that this self-determination has bred a proper sense of dignity and wishing to remain an independent agent. I wish this level of dignity upon everyone. Unfortunately, the buy-to-let demographic have mostly achieved this through taking away the dignity and life-options of other people; hence of course the general sentiment on this thread that when they catch fire (due to S24) we would rush across the road to their side ... but only to warm our hands. My ambivalent attitude extends to hmrc equally. In some sense, it's nice having a lion asleep in the back-yard, who will occasionally wake up and eat passing buy-to-let landlords, or other people we don't like. Once it's finished eating those people though, we still have a lion in our back yard - and although I would behave properly towards it even were it only a sheep, I do not enjoy living in fear that I might accidentally kick it as I pass. I am particularly disturbed by the tightening net of information cast around us by the online hmrc systems, which seem uniquely efficient for government infrastructure. I don't believe I have ever under-paid my taxes (and I have certainly never intended to do so), but if we are going to have a ruthlessly efficient tax system, it's got to be extraordinarily clear and simple, so that you cannot screw up by mistake. If we don't, we'll be in the situation that everyone might fear they are an inadvertent criminal, and democracy will be dead. Top line: All authority is evil. Occasionally it is a necessary evil - but much less often than you might suppose. By the way, sorry for interrupting the flow of this celebratory thread: I just meant to write a couple of words rather than an essay. Just carry on and ignore me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byron Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 1 hour ago, Toast said: hence of course the general sentiment on this thread that when they catch fire (due to S24) we would rush across the road to their side ... but only to warm our hands. Oh boy, have I got cold hands! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freki Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 I love how she does not claim that in most cases IR is deductible for OO on their main residency. So the game is evened out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A third of everything Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 How can they ever think they will get any sympathy, if they weren't hoarding houses over and above their own they wouldn't be in this position. Sell up, get a proper job like all your poor tenants. Really has shown them for what they are, deluded fools Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pop321 Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 2 hours ago, Toast said: It is an important principle of democracy that the institutions of government exist for, and are at the service of, "we the people". There should be no penalty for being rude, nor objecting the policies or behaviour of some authority, if someone feels they are being mistreated; and I think it is a mark of self-sufficiency and human dignity to object in just this way. Now, obviously, many (ideally all) of the politics and institutions of this land, such as the police, and (arguably) hmrc, exist by consent, in order to make sure we do not damage or exploit our fellow man, and that we contribute something to the fabric of our common society. In that case, it is of course right that the actions of the institution should not be influenced, one way or the other, by us being rude and objectionable - provided we do, if only under sufferance, comply. If I am arrested by a police officer, I believe I should be able to call him an ass without suffering for those words, but not that I should be able to resist arrest. In that sense, good for them that they are writing to politicians. Appreciate the point you are making and my editing of your post perhaps removes some of your balance. I work in service industry. Customers are absolutely and totally King. However, if a customer is rude to staff their accounts are closed. Same all over now...hospital staff, traffic wardens, train conductors. The tone of her approach is unprofessional and ranty calling MPs 'stupid'. So she is getting the responses that are deserved. Re the sleeping lion...I agree we shouldn't be in fear of it and my very close experiences and 'challenges' in the past with HMRC do make you acutely aware to tread carefully even when whiter than white. But I did say I believe HMRC are not unprofessional enough to get retribution and as you say (rightly) they are there to serve. It just seems to a third party observer that prodding the lion with a stick seems daft....not that I would consider the lion blameless if it took a bite. So no penalty for challenging. But there is a penalty for being rude....mainly that people stop listening to all elements of the complaint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pop321 Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 12 hours ago, Bear Hug said: We (and Dross Bosher) will find out soon what it is hopefully! What I like about here, is that if someone goes batshit crazy, it will at least be pointed out to them. On poverty 118 - anything goes, as long as it''s in line with S24 is wrong/cant' go wrong with bricks'n'mortar It's hard to pick my favourite poverty 118 poster to thank for their pro-HPC efforts. So many excellent attempts to represent landlords as totally inhuman scumbags Just as well we don't have a Christmas party. We would need to invite several 118'ers for their contribution to the cause ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bland Unsight Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 12 hours ago, Bear Hug said: We (and Dross Bosher) will find out soon what it is hopefully! What I like about here, is that if someone goes batshit crazy, it will at least be pointed out to them. On poverty 118 - anything goes, as long as it''s in line with S24 is wrong/cant' go wrong with bricks'n'mortar The Bosh appears to be aware of her new nickname! Is it possible that despite repeated assertions to the contrary Dr Beck has lowered herself to reading HPC? Anyway, here's an extract from her latest, which she's titled "A personal view of Shelter’s latest anti-landlord campaign". I'll just paste the introductory paragraph, but the whole thing is a rewarding read (and not too long either). Quote I am writing my thoughts here about Shelter, because they appear to have banned me from their Facebook page. I can still see their campaigns, but have no right to reply on their site, so have chosen to point out here what I would have written on their page: Getting evicted from the Shelter Facebook page in the same week as getting an official 'die in the a fire' letter from the Treasury. The masterclass continues! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnglishinWales Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 2 million landlords vs 9 million renters (so I have heard). Surely they understand the numbers are just not on their side? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dyson Fury Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 14 hours ago, Phil321 said: 28/04/2017 at 17:43 Just sent this: Dear Ms Patel. I find the unwillingness of the Treasury representatives to answer my legitimate questions completely unsatisfactory. Can you please forward me the details of the process to be followed to make a formal complaint? All the best. Dr Beck ----------- What will Ros do if Ms Patel won't answer her question, or doesn't reply at all? My prediction is for a null content reply along these lines: "Dear Dr Beck Thank you for your inquiry. The information you have requested is given in the Treasury's Customer Service Standard Policy Statement, which is available on the Treasury website at www.treasury.gov.uk Thank you for your interest in this matter. Yours etc.." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venger Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 (edited) 6 hours ago, Toast said: Perhaps Rosalind Beck is not a great poster-child for the view I'm about to express here, but I'm actually happy she feels free to mouth off to the powers that be, because this should be true for all of us. It is an important principle of democracy that the institutions of government exist for, and are at the service of, "we the people". There should be no penalty for being rude, nor objecting the policies or behaviour of some authority, if someone feels they are being mistreated; and I think it is a mark of self-sufficiency and human dignity to object in just this way. Now, obviously, many (ideally all) of the politics and institutions of this land, such as the police, and (arguably) hmrc, exist by consent, in order to make sure we do not damage or exploit our fellow man, and that we contribute something to the fabric of our common society. In that case, it is of course right that the actions of the institution should not be influenced, one way or the other, by us being rude and objectionable - provided we do, if only under sufferance, comply. If I am arrested by a police officer, I believe I should be able to call him an ass without suffering for those words, but not that I should be able to resist arrest. In that sense, good for them that they are writing to politicians. Where my admiration for the letter-writing campaign falters, is the content of what they are trying to achieve. They have managed to make an independent living, without being pushed around by some boss in a company. I admire the quest for that freedom, and I can see that this self-determination has bred a proper sense of dignity and wishing to remain an independent agent. I wish this level of dignity upon everyone. Unfortunately, the buy-to-let demographic have mostly achieved this through taking away the dignity and life-options of other people; hence of course the general sentiment on this thread that when they catch fire (due to S24) we would rush across the road to their side ... but only to warm our hands. My ambivalent attitude extends to hmrc equally. In some sense, it's nice having a lion asleep in the back-yard, who will occasionally wake up and eat passing buy-to-let landlords, or other people we don't like. Once it's finished eating those people though, we still have a lion in our back yard - and although I would behave properly towards it even were it only a sheep, I do not enjoy living in fear that I might accidentally kick it as I pass. I am particularly disturbed by the tightening net of information cast around us by the online hmrc systems, which seem uniquely efficient for government infrastructure. I don't believe I have ever under-paid my taxes (and I have certainly never intended to do so), but if we are going to have a ruthlessly efficient tax system, it's got to be extraordinarily clear and simple, so that you cannot screw up by mistake. If we don't, we'll be in the situation that everyone might fear they are an inadvertent criminal, and democracy will be dead. Top line: All authority is evil. Occasionally it is a necessary evil - but much less often than you might suppose. By the way, sorry for interrupting the flow of this celebratory thread: I just meant to write a couple of words rather than an essay. Just carry on and ignore me! That's great, but I don't want to play. Welcome to the real-world. Power exists. And it is often use to indulge or to shake things up. We position as we position. There are limits. HM Treasury/HMRC have corresponded with the BTLers (indepth) since 2015 over Section24, and explained the rationale. (Standby for the post I wanted to make before replying to you). They have explained that they now consider the matter closed (to this BTLer). We already have a lot of freedom of protest. The BTLers are not a cause to rally around as leading lights against Authority/Power, and scaremongering that we should have sleepless nights because 'you could be next' against overuse of power/authority. Of all the causes to choose. ________________ Haven't you got to continue to play Pity The Most Recent Homeowners? Something I have read so many times since 2008 on HPC. Only 'the educated' (many who have been HPI+ wrong for many years) to keep carrying it. It is a market and individuals take choices. No one is coming along to with many £10Ks to rebalance my position on the renter years side of things, against HPI++++++ and the buyers who bought and it proved a sensible financial decision vs renting. And tbh buyer GOT WHAT THEY WANTED. If people want the security of owning (whatever the high price) and buy, over what others have put up with renting (because they refuse to or can't pay the prices others choose to pay), that is their own market choice, all done without you/me. Their own minds and their own risks...market. And for many years proven to be good choice on the financial balance sheet side vs renting away. And may still be in years to come. Why we should just make this place a temple of sorrow if house prices fall, because other people took a market choice. You give an out to one, you give an out to all. It's a market. Renters/young people exist too... people who refuse to pay these prices/can't pay these prices. On 3/11/2017 at 2:42 PM, Toast said: ...Some people will face that moral question honestly, valiantly try to do what is right, but stumble in the struggle, and make a "second best" choice. It is for those people, if events turn on a sixpence, and they are "found out" in their greed, that I have genuine sympathy. I have very little courage, so perhaps I am just saying that I would have sympathy for myself when and if I am found wanting. However, there are situations in life (particularly at the ragged edges of wars) where almost everyone will be found wanting. To make this more concrete and relevant to the forum: The housing market, as it now is, is set up to be morally testing - even scarifying. We compete with each other for the basic human needs of security and shelter. If this housing market implodes (and only at that point), I am saying that I will have sympathy for those people who suffer in the crash, who realised that buying at high prices had a cost for society at large, who tried to avoid those societal costs as long as possible, but whose moral force was not enough to make the sacrifices of continuing to rent. That's a list of "and"'s, not "or"'s. By sympathy, I mean the cheap sentiment, and I also mean that if I am in a position to reasonably help someone that I know in that situation, then I hope I will be able to make that sacrifice. I do not mean that I will campaign for, nor want there to be state aid - which would mean supporting spending other people's money at essentially no cost to myself. I am not saying that renting is a sacrifice for everyone: many people like the freedom and lack of maintenance duties, and for some people that's enough to make it the better choice even outside a housing bubble. However, there are real costs for some: a lack of security, the humiliation of inspections, the difficulty of putting down roots, social opprobrium. The inability to stomach those consequences is what will arouse my compassion. You also notice I described those who "stumble", and make a "second best choice", which in this case would be buying a home to live in, even though it means pushing prices up further and endangering the stability of the system of money. "Second best" does not encompass those who hoard houses in a housing crisis, and thus actively take away other people's simple choices and self-determination. What about those who went in with their eyes closed and just did what their friends and family did? I have not mentioned them so far, but I think this "housing crisis" is so apparent, and the situation so clear when one looks at the price and thinks how long it would take to save up that amount, that no-one can just follow their friends without being willfully blind. My apologies that this has become a very long post ... but I've read a few long posts on the topic, so I don't think it's entirely out of place. In summary: Not everyone is a saint or a martyr, but we all have to make an honest attempt to understand our surroundings and push a little in that direction, rather than parasitize and tread society underfoot in our quest to die with the most toys. Those who make that honest attempt and find themselves wanting, I will have sympathy for. Edited April 29, 2017 by Venger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.