Jon the Hat

A trust was set up a few years ago to handle a compensation award for her disabled son. When they divorced, as their home is modified to provide a safe environment for their son, they decided to transfer ownership of the home to the trust so the children could continue to live there, with the parents sharing carer arrangements at different times. She took her money out and used it as a deposit on the flat in Hove. As they trust is now the owner of the house, she doesn't own the house, or have any financial investment in the house. However, as it appears she is a trustee of that trust, she is still named on the deeds of the house, and technically she might - in the event of the death of the trust beneficiaries, benefit herself. As a result, a senior tax expert has advised her the safest route is to pay the higher rate of stamp duty. I suspect in most cases the advice would be to pay the standard rate unless HMRC determined otherwise, but as she is a public figure this doesn't really work for her. Now, I think most people would use a conveyancing solicitor to acquire the house, and they would be asked if they own another home. I assume she has then said no to that question, however she should have revealed the trust and then taken further advice from an expert. That is her responsibility, and really whoever setup the trust in the first place should have advised her of this.

The total they loaned to the club and later converted to equity (shares) was 194M. It means they don't want the money repaid, but leave it in the club. Obviously if they were to sell the would want it back. The main reason for doing this is loans attract interest and repayment, whereas return on equity is earned as dividends. If you have a loss making entity and you want to reduce its cost base, converting loans to equity means less interest taken out of the club. As interest is part of the PSR calculation, this helps us.

He was worth a shot, just not at the fee or wages he commanded.

It is not straightforward at all.

If they are not female, in a female only space. Which would be illegal.

The much bigger impact on your kids is to pass as much as possible of that inheritance to them as soon as you can and help them get on the housing ladder. its not fair, but it is the right thing to do personally.

It sounds to me like she took her money out of the Manchester house, but as she is still a beneficiary of that trust in the event of her ex-husbands death, (so she can care for their children), she technically still has an interest. Seems a bit outside the point of the stamp duty rules to be honest. Edit: This indeed the story the Times are telling. She took out 170k and used most of it as a deposit on the flat.

They are pretty good at walking that line, hopefully Trump as not permanently pushed them to China. Likewise Indonesia.

Telling people that their personal experience is wrong, or their feelings are racist or they are a TERF is such a bad way to get their support. The main parties have done this over and over again and have a lot to answer for. Brexit and reform are a reaction to this kind of politics, and if they win it will be because our main parties fail to listen, or do so too late.

I think we can say over the past 30ish years the rewards available to those with capital to invest, pretty much regardless of where they invested it, has been far in excess of that available to those using their hard work or intelligence. We are the first generation when in large swathes of the country (also true in Australia) you will have to be very very successful to buy a home as nice as your parents, or at all, without inheriting. Meanwhile, a combination of technology, capital and globalisation has concentrated wealth in such a way that individual countries have been unable to tax them appropriately to support their domestic economies and the improving quality of life people expect. I hope there is a way to rebalance this.

Even I am not daft enough to argue Starmer is worse than the recent shower of shit the Tories have had leading them. That said, Starmer has been disappointing so far. We knew he was dull, we didn't know he was also a bit weak. Still he has the gift of time to get it right.

It's a shame the best political operative in a generation is leading Reform and has a worrying agenda and is surrounded by *****. Otherwise it is political lightweights everywhere.

If they don't improve in the polls in the next 2 years I would expect a leadership change.

And the scruffiest probably, although Super Stevie Claridge could probably argue that point.

It could be even better if we kicked the goddists out of the house of Lords. Fine appoint some if you want to on an adhoc basis, but permanent places, no.

Good luck to him. I am quite relieved to see him not turn up at Leeds or similar.

I'm not fully in the loop but it sounds a bit like Australia Day down here!

Thanks now I want a beer and crisps.

Indeed, didn't Real Madrid pay 10M quid to get Alexander-Arnold a few weeks early for the WCC?

I think on balance I will leave it.

I think on balance I will leave it.

Or Ulloa, or Okazaki. Not sure mind you who is playing the Vardy role in my scenario.

I travel quite a lot for work, including 10 day trips to Europe a couple of times a year, and that puts pressure on family life. I know many people, (I am sure you do too) who chose not to take a role which demands that, so they could be at home with their family. If you agree one thing and your employer starts demanding another it can be disruptive, and margins are tiny at this elite level of sport between brilliant and just off the pace. I always remember the Leeds / Bowyer and Woodgate assault trial. During that trial Bowyer played out of his skin, and Woodgate was a shadow of his former self. Stress and pressure affects people differently.

Linehan is a bit weird no doubt, but if telling girls they should feel free to defend themselves against a bloke in the ladies toilets is now inciting violence then WTF.

It's impossible to judge the guy really, as we don't know the dynamic with Rudkin and Top, or the criteria he was given to work within in each window.