Brighton News RSS Feed


Celia Barlow used MPs expenses to spruce up Hove home


Celia Barlow’s finances have come under scrutiny from the Telegraph in its latest round of MPs’ expenses revelations.

Hove MP Miss Barlow has made political capital out of the fact that last year she claimed nothing last year in second home allowances, choosing to get the train back from Westminster to her constituency instead.

But the Telegraph today reveals she took advantage of the system to make extensive renovations to her Hove home and claim moving costs, including stamp duty. The total paid out was more than £28,000.

This was despite telling the Commons Fees Office the £550,000 Hove property would become her main home.

The Labour MP initially claimed £29,399 for stamp duty, mortgage broker’s fees and legal fees and removal costs, of which £13,881was paid.

In the next financial year, from May 2006 to October 2006, she was paid £15,042 for renovations, storage and more removals.

The renovations include redecorating two bathrooms, £1,000 for electrical work, £540 for gardening, and £520 for removing a shed from her new garden and getting rid of unwanted concrete.

Last week, she told The Argus she had “no idea” how people would react if they learnt the full details of her expense claims.

However, today she told The Telegraph that all the claims had been made with the agreement of the fees office.

She said the fees office had asked if she intended to make the Hove address her main home when she nominated it as her second after buying it in January 2006.

She added: “I said that I probably would do so which I did after the move to Hove was concluded. I was advised to claim for the cost of moving into the Hove home.”

She also said the porch was installed for security reasons, one bathroom was bare and the other had a broken lavatory.

Miss Barlow said the move took time because her children went to school in Chichester.

Breakdown of claims and payouts for the Hove home

  • January 2006 - £29,399 for stamp duty, mortgage broker’s fees and legal fees and removal costs. £13,881 was paid.
  • May 2006 - £1,437 for moving furniture
  • July 2006 - £5,565 claim, including £2,321 for “alterations to two bathrooms”, £502 for storage, £294 bill for a bed and a chair. She was paid all but £446, because receipts for furniture dated back to the last allowance year, making the total £5,119.
  • July 2006 - £1,060 for gardening, removing a wooden shed and concrete and installing a porch door. £520 was rejected, but it is not clear if the balance was paid or not.
  • August 2006 – £5,183 claim on second homes allowance, including £2,458 for bathroom goods from Bathstore including a lavatory, basin, shower valve and “high lustre silver” bath screen. She was paid £4,935.
  • October 2006 – Another claim of £4,181 including £458 for a whirlpool bath, £574 for more bathroom goods and £1,183 for electrical services. She was paid £3,570. By this time, she had hit the maximum amount claimable in a financial year, £22,110, five months early.

Your Say YourArgus

Osama bin there, Brighton says...
9:19am Thu 28 May 09

'Another one bites the dust'...

Wait for...'but it ws all within the rules' comment.

Coffee Bucks, St James' Street says...
9:24am Thu 28 May 09

umm... she was named and shamed weeks ago, in the first round of "leaks" and by all accounts, she came off pretty well compared to the others in the area.

Stripes, Brighton says...
9:48am Thu 28 May 09

Well Done Celia Barlow for 'getting the train' back from London to the sout coast. Very admirable of you, oh and the thousands of others who do it every day without fuss.

Masterchav, Brighton says...
11:05am Thu 28 May 09

Labour sleaze

Fercri Sakes, Hove says...
11:21am Thu 28 May 09

Masterchav wrote:
Labour sleaze
Percentagely the Conservatives have been worse.

keep the faith, hove says...
11:23am Thu 28 May 09

"However, today she told The Telegraph that all the claims had been made with the agreement of the fees office" What a load of Bo*****s
Who set the rules for the fees office...Mmmm you and the rest of your merry gang of MP's with their snouts in the trough! Everyone of them is culpable as they all had the ability to challenge and try and change these rules over the past years, but who did... not one of them. You should all hang your head in shame and be sent to the tower!!!

Arriseme, Brighton says...
11:43am Thu 28 May 09

Another New Labour tribune of the people, another daughter of toil, another champion of the poor, underprivileged and dispossessed and what do we find? An over-privileged desktop socialist with a half million pound house and an Islington Labour lifestyle with its Tuscany villa double standards. I do wonder how long the British public are going to put up with people like this. All that income, a house that most of her constituents can only dream of, and which they have helped to pay for, and she claims off us for a broken lavatory and a whirlpool bath; she claims the maximum permissible. It is beyond disgusting and disgraceful now, it is looting, and it is criminal. Celia Barlow has been caught thieving from the taxpayer and should never be re-elected.

Mr. Kipling, Hove says...
11:57am Thu 28 May 09

I certainly shan`t be voting for her when the time comes.

perhaps I should stand. I`ll simply ask the electorate what they want and try and do that.

And not claim any expenses. The wages are enough, I wouldn`t need any more

Code word: Fill-wife
(with what?)

Jackie26, Hove says...
12:08pm Thu 28 May 09

Hold on, let's not get to carried away.

I'm not condoning house improvements at the tax-payers expense, but she took office in 2005 after previously living in Chichester, surely moving and redecoration expenses are what you'd expect, if you're of the opinion that the MP should actually bother to live in their constituency.


Even still, Ms Barlow for all her faults is actually involved in Hove, at least she bothers with Surgeries

Besides, it's hardly a duck island...

Hugh Rinall, Brighton says...
12:18pm Thu 28 May 09

Ah, bankers and MPs, the chocolate teapots of this world! Good old Daily T. you can smell the Westminster sweat from here!

Voice of the silent Majority, Hove says...
12:46pm Thu 28 May 09

So whe Labour parachuted her in from Chichester and dupmed this "Local on Hove" we the tax payer where left to pick up the bills on her move.
She really is a peice of work who will be back to whereever once Crash Gordon is dragged to the polls.
Good-bye to another free loading do nothing Labour, do as i say not as i do, has never been

Granny, Brighton says...
12:48pm Thu 28 May 09

Another dishonest, moneygrabbing crook!

Alison Smith, Brighton says...
12:59pm Thu 28 May 09

Champagne Socialists strike again.

keep the faith, hove says...
1:12pm Thu 28 May 09

Thinking about moving soon wonder if my company will pay for the new place to be re-furbished as it's a bit tatty...!!!

Security word
move-keep (ironic!)


keep the faith, hove says...
1:43pm Thu 28 May 09

They said no...

Barney McGrew, Trumpton says...
1:49pm Thu 28 May 09

It makes me feel physically sick. That's about all I have to say.

pun master, Hove says...
2:11pm Thu 28 May 09

Jackie26 wrote:
Hold on, let's not get to carried away.

I'm not condoning house improvements at the tax-payers expense, but she took office in 2005 after previously living in Chichester, surely moving and redecoration expenses are what you'd expect, if you're of the opinion that the MP should actually bother to live in their constituency.


Even still, Ms Barlow for all her faults is actually involved in Hove, at least she bothers with Surgeries

Besides, it's hardly a duck island...
Lets not get carried away? What planet are you on... The point here is not that whether she lives in her constituency or not, but about the fact that these MP's have claimed every last penny they can get their hands on. I am a teacher in Rottingdean, live in Hove - I serve the local community, do I have the right to claim for redecoration work at my house? Guido Fawkes had the right idea. Apart from being a barking mad Catholic of course...

AJPrince, Lewes says...
2:41pm Thu 28 May 09

Guy Fawkes should indeed be cleared post-humously of any wrong doing. I'm guessing he'll be absent from Lewes Bonfire celebration this year, organisers will be too busy building MP effigies.

Jackie26, Hove says...
4:15pm Thu 28 May 09

pun master wrote:
Jackie26 wrote:
Hold on, let's not get to carried away.

I'm not condoning house improvements at the tax-payers expense, but she took office in 2005 after previously living in Chichester, surely moving and redecoration expenses are what you'd expect, if you're of the opinion that the MP should actually bother to live in their constituency.


Even still, Ms Barlow for all her faults is actually involved in Hove, at least she bothers with Surgeries

Besides, it's hardly a duck island...
Lets not get carried away? What planet are you on... The point here is not that whether she lives in her constituency or not, but about the fact that these MP's have claimed every last penny they can get their hands on. I am a teacher in Rottingdean, live in Hove - I serve the local community, do I have the right to claim for redecoration work at my house? Guido Fawkes had the right idea. Apart from being a barking mad Catholic of course...
Of course not, I'm not implying that charging the tax payer for house redecoration is in any shape or form acceptable...

What I was implying is that judging from the tax year (06) and when Ms Barlow took office, it looks like it coincides with her moving to Hove, rather than just a "I want my house redone"

I might be wrong though, but think of it another way. Would you take a similarly paid job elsewhere that required you to move, without being offered a "resettlement package" in a private company?

Secondly, the "let's not get carried way" bit was just, this isn't the same as moat cleaning or duck fortifications, it's moving costs and bathrooms. Still wrong, but not the same brush.


Then finally, as a constituent, apart from the expenses malarky, I haven't had much to fault Celia with so far, whilst expenses and accountability are hugely important, they're not the only issues in politics

jyan, says...
4:59pm Thu 28 May 09

"£540 for gardening, and £520 for removing a shed from her new garden and getting rid of unwanted concrete. "

That's a ridiculous amount of money spent on those items alone! How are gardening, removing an unwanted shed and concrete legitimate expenses? The thieving cow must be looking for a new job very soon.

Jim BB, Brighton says...
5:35pm Thu 28 May 09

I've moved home a few times for work and never been offered money to relocate but took the job knowing I'd have to move because I wanted that role.

Why should it be any different for an MP who's already paid far more than most of us?

Also, we have to declare perks such as coffee as a taxable benefit but MPs seem to expect taxpayers to pay them for drinking it.

Masterchav, Brighton says...
5:38pm Thu 28 May 09

Celia Barlow's total expenses (that includes office costs, staffing allowance, centrally purchased stationery, postage, central IT provision, staff and other costs, communications allowance), salary not included, can be seen here in glorious detail (copy the URL to your browser)
http://www.parliamen
t.uk/about_commons/h
ocallowances/hocallo
wances06.cfm

and for the earlier years here http://www.parliamen
t.uk/about_commons/h
ocallowances/hoc_exp
enditure04.cfm

Put it like this - she's not cheap and only didn't claim 2nd homes allowance in the 2007-8 year.

The £1 claimed for 3rd party vehicle mileage and rental is particularly entertaining.

Enjoy

joshingimnot, hove says...
6:12pm Thu 28 May 09

i agree with all or most of the above, how many of you know that this awful woman also has 2 London homes both rented out her boyfriend bought the hove house and she has another one somewhere.so dont feel sorry for her coming home on the train or not claiming for 2 years, she only stopped when it came out that she was the highest claiming pm of that year total hypocrite. she didn't think of her constituents she is more worried about the poor in Africa (who don't have luxury bathrooms) and whales, app she is concerned that ships are making too much noise around them. make sure you vote this thieving hypocrite out if she isn't sacked before hand.

stickman, Portslade says...
6:41pm Thu 28 May 09

Shame - I have lived in a few different constituencies in my time and she is the only MP I ever heard from outside of election time.

Mr Kipling - you may have been only joking but go for it - you will have my vote. Sounds like real democracy to me.

yorkie44, Woodingdean says...
7:10pm Thu 28 May 09

One more MP to vote out at the next election. It is no wonder that ordinary people on salaries much less than an MPs salary are having trouble making ends meet. Our MPs are totally out of touch. Perhaps instead of a salary increase we should pay them the average salary and perhaps they would then finally undestand what they have to do to run the country.

stan bailey, brighton says...
7:49pm Thu 28 May 09

AJPrince wrote:
Guy Fawkes should indeed be cleared post-humously of any wrong doing. I'm guessing he'll be absent from Lewes Bonfire celebration this year, organisers will be too busy building MP effigies.
mmmm. Spoilt for choice this year.

For goodness sake Celia just resign. You are supposed to be a socialist, not a money grabbing sum bag

Variable, Brighton says...
8:25pm Thu 28 May 09

Celia, if you've read this far, you must realise there's only one course of action. Resign, before you get thrown off the battlements. You have been exposed as a greedy hypocrite and you have completely lost the confidence of your electors. Go now.

Tye, Brighton says...
8:34pm Thu 28 May 09

I worked for a large multinational and despite hating politicians for being hypocrits have to say that when an "international manager" was asked to move from one country to another his salary was boosted( to compensate for the tax he would pay for the "freebies")

his expenses in the first few years were about 3 times their salary, they got tax advice , they got a house, a car and private schools fees paid so lets not go over the top and try and end democratcic Government - Grow up poor people as some old Tory MP said - It is a lot of jealousy from thick poor people - he was told to shut up pretty quick as we don't like the truth do we?

TheInsider, Brighton says...
8:38pm Thu 28 May 09

Anyone who has also had any dealings with Celia Barlow will also know that she is dreadful at dealing with issues and relies on her partner to advise her on what to say/do.
All parties are guilty of having people in their ranks who believe it is ok to claim for absolutely anything just because they can.
They can't and the gravy train has come to a halt. Some of this current Parliament will be disembarking and never getting back on the train. Some of them may actually find it difficult to find employment as private industry consider them immoral and nothing short of thieves.
I would not employ any of them as I could never be sure they weren't fiddling their expenses or skiving off.
They are not really accountable to anyone except at election time.
Stand down Celia. There are no excuses.

davyboy, abingdon, oxon says...
9:49pm Thu 28 May 09

the 'rules' must be re-written. 1stly, why do mp's get paid so much (£65000+) and then get allowances on top? 2ndly how can we trust a bunch of people who can write their own rules in the first place. mp's should get the average salary of the country(around £25000) and thats it. nothing else. normal people cannot ask everyone else to furnish their houses, so why should we furnish mp's houses. maybe there could be an allowance for staying in london if required, but this should be the price of a room at a premiere inn, and a big mac meal, just like normal folks do. i'm not saying they cannot have second homes, but don't ask the public to pay for it.

Guerrero, Alicante says...
10:13pm Thu 28 May 09

Tye wrote:
I worked for a large multinational and despite hating politicians for being hypocrits have to say that when an "international manager" was asked to move from one country to another his salary was boosted( to compensate for the tax he would pay for the "freebies") his expenses in the first few years were about 3 times their salary, they got tax advice , they got a house, a car and private schools fees paid so lets not go over the top and try and end democratcic Government - Grow up poor people as some old Tory MP said - It is a lot of jealousy from thick poor people - he was told to shut up pretty quick as we don't like the truth do we?
Yeah.Shut the fcuk up poor people,you thick bstards.You're just jealous.
Go have a fry up and face the truth.
Remember though.Your taxes.Taken from what you paupers earn.Pays for those disgusting leeches lightbulbs, toilet seats,manure and servants' quarters.
With what is occuring in Korea and the evident loss of faith in democracy.With the obvious strength and rise of Islam and their willingness to hold true to their beliefs.Christianity and democracy are massively under threat.
Personally I think a change is needed.
Maybe a radical one.
Hasta la revolución.

leonsky, brighton says...
10:51pm Thu 28 May 09

well as someone who has never been able to claim anything I am discusted by the sheer greed of these people. I keep hearing about there self made rules but not about honesty and integrity. I am 68 and worked all my life from the age of 15 my income from the OAP and company oension which I had to contribute to is about £1000 per month and I pay about £100 tax which contributes toward this expenses scam. Fot those who argue that for a job like an MP £69000 per annum sound prrrity good to me. If the argument is that to get the best people for the job. Didn't seem to work for the Banks did it. Look at the mess these deadbeets have made of the country. Get them all out and please please vote for the honest may above the slike media minpulators.

Tye, Brighton says...
6:54am Fri 29 May 09

To Davyboy - £65k a lot? Yes for "normal people" BUT how about 3 times that for running a local council, over twice that for being a councils professional liar i.e press officer, (and they got expenses IF they wanted to move nearer their new office) or £500k for deciding to retire early (but getting your solicitor to write your resignation)
so lets get things into perspective and go for the big money crooks

Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit, Brighton says...
7:45am Fri 29 May 09

Osama bin there wrote:
'Another one bites the dust'... Wait for...'but it ws all within the rules' comment.
And who makes up the rules? The MPs do! No wonder everything is always 'within the rules'. Can you imagine if Dole cheats were allowed to make their own rules:

"Yeah, I know I've been claiming dole whilst working cash-in-hand for my mate - but I've done nothing wrong, it's all within my rules!"

ABC1, Brighton says...
7:47am Fri 29 May 09

Why is anyone surprised at any of this anymore?

Why are people like Hazel Blears and Alastair Darling still in office?

None of these people will go until they lose at an election. This gives them a for-life pension and a big pay-off.

Politics is one big gravy train, and no-one is going to get off lightly.....

ade234uk, Peacehaven says...
7:48am Fri 29 May 09

We are all working hard to keep our heads above the water, and then we have politicians who think it is acceptable to claim expenses to fill their own pockets.

If I went to claim £458 for a whirlpool bath, £574 for more bathroom goods and £1,183 for electrical services I would be shown the door by my boss.

tinkywinky, Brighton says...
9:28am Fri 29 May 09

The public go to jail for benefit fraud. Mp's call it an oversight and get away with it. Thy tried their hardest to prevent us from knowing their scams and robbery of the public purse. Shame on them all and shame on a justice system that lets them off with their 'oversights'

Brian62, Brighton says...
1:49pm Fri 29 May 09

The Green Book 2009 www.parliament.uk/do
cuments/upload/Green
Book.pdf places strong emphasis on Principles, which if these she had bothered to read Section 1 of the Green Book before rushing off to read Section 2 pages 12-56 of what she could claim for, some of the more astute might not be in the position they find themselves in.

Pages 6-9, Section 1.3 describes the Fundamental Principles. What follows is a verbatim extract :

In July 1995, the House agreed to adopt the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament – which includes a number of general principles of personal conduct. These are based on concepts of selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership.

The broad principles set out below are derived from the Code of Conduct and underpin the allowance regime. When making claims against parliamentary allowances, Members must adhere to these principles.

The principles are:

* Claims should be above reproach and must reflect actual usage of the resources being claimed.

* Claims must only be made for expenditure that it was necessary for a Member to incur to ensure that he or she could properly perform his or her parliamentary duties.

* Allowances are reimbursed only for the purpose of a Member carrying out his or her parliamentary duties.

* Members must ensure that claims do not give rise to, or give the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else.

* Members are committed to openness about what expenditure has been incurred and for what purposes.

* Individual Members take personal responsibility for all expenses incurred, for making claims and for keeping records, even if the administration of claims is delegated by them to others.

* The requirement of ensuring value for money is central in claiming for accommodation, goods or services – Members should avoid purchases which could be seen as extravagant or luxurious.

* Claims must be supported by documentary evidence, except where the House has agreed that such evidence is not necessary.

Applying the principles

In the majority of cases, the application of these principles will be straightforward. But the role of Members is constantly evolving and different Members have different needs, priorities and ways of performing their duties. Therefore there will always be areas of uncertainty and the need to exercise individual judgement.

The following questions are designed to assist Members in coming to a decision about whether or not costs incurred are appropriate to be met from the allowances:

* Is this expense genuinely incurred by me in my role as a Member of Parliament as opposed to my personal capacity?

* Is this purchase supporting me in carrying out my parliamentary duties? Anything which is done for personal benefit will not be part of a Member's parliamentary duties.

* Does the claim match the purpose of the allowance in question as set out later in the Green Book?

* Could the claim in any way damage the reputation of Parliament or its Members?

* How comfortable do I feel with the knowledge that my claim will be available to the public under Freedom of Information?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~

None of the above is ‘new’ to 2009; previous editions of the Green Book are almost identical. So judge for yourself how the ‘system’ or how the ‘Fees Office’ can be to blame?

davyboy, abingdon, oxon says...
5:29pm Fri 29 May 09

Tye wrote:
To Davyboy - £65k a lot? Yes for "normal people" BUT how about 3 times that for running a local council, over twice that for being a councils professional liar i.e press officer, (and they got expenses IF they wanted to move nearer their new office) or £500k for deciding to retire early (but getting your solicitor to write your resignation)
so lets get things into perspective and go for the big money crooks
point taken. it wouldn't be SO bad if these politicians, whom WE elect, did what they were supposed to do. i.e as we, the electorate, want them to do. we all want lower taxes(but there has to be some), less immigration, and a decent standard of living, which are not getting. when there are some folk who have to choose whether to heat or eat, there is something fundamentally wrong. also, why do we need 600+ mp's? why not 1 or 2 for each county? all these tax increases, either direct or indirect just fund the mp's extravagant lifestyles and do nothing for the normal person

Tye, Brighton says...
9:16am Sat 30 May 09

Guerrero wrote:
Tye wrote: I worked for a large multinational and despite hating politicians for being hypocrits have to say that when an "international manager" was asked to move from one country to another his salary was boosted( to compensate for the tax he would pay for the "freebies") his expenses in the first few years were about 3 times their salary, they got tax advice , they got a house, a car and private schools fees paid so lets not go over the top and try and end democratcic Government - Grow up poor people as some old Tory MP said - It is a lot of jealousy from thick poor people - he was told to shut up pretty quick as we don't like the truth do we?
Yeah.Shut the fcuk up poor people,you thick bstards.You're just jealous. Go have a fry up and face the truth. Remember though.Your taxes.Taken from what you paupers earn.Pays for those disgusting leeches lightbulbs, toilet seats,manure and servants' quarters. With what is occuring in Korea and the evident loss of faith in democracy.With the obvious strength and rise of Islam and their willingness to hold true to their beliefs.Christianity and democracy are massively under threat. Personally I think a change is needed. Maybe a radical one. Hasta la revolución.
Has the penny not fropped yet?

If you're "poor" you pay no taxes as you have nothing, If you are rich you have good accountants so pay no tax BUT amazingly have a hell more clout with our politicians so whose left?
muggins in the middle

Spain I know has in the past got tens of billions of eu tax revenue but i guess with all those corrupt eastern european countries wanting their share of the dosh Spain will suffer economically and youmay have to pay more tax (unless youre one of these Dail Mail hate figure specials)

Randy Lahey, Sunnyvale Trailer Park says...
10:43am Mon 1 Jun 09

Brian62 wrote:
The Green Book 2009 www.parliament.uk/do cuments/upload/Green Book.pdf places strong emphasis on Principles, which if these she had bothered to read Section 1 of the Green Book before rushing off to read Section 2 pages 12-56 of what she could claim for, some of the more astute might not be in the position they find themselves in. Pages 6-9, Section 1.3 describes the Fundamental Principles. What follows is a verbatim extract : In July 1995, the House agreed to adopt the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament – which includes a number of general principles of personal conduct. These are based on concepts of selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. The broad principles set out below are derived from the Code of Conduct and underpin the allowance regime. When making claims against parliamentary allowances, Members must adhere to these principles. The principles are: * Claims should be above reproach and must reflect actual usage of the resources being claimed. * Claims must only be made for expenditure that it was necessary for a Member to incur to ensure that he or she could properly perform his or her parliamentary duties. * Allowances are reimbursed only for the purpose of a Member carrying out his or her parliamentary duties. * Members must ensure that claims do not give rise to, or give the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else. * Members are committed to openness about what expenditure has been incurred and for what purposes. * Individual Members take personal responsibility for all expenses incurred, for making claims and for keeping records, even if the administration of claims is delegated by them to others. * The requirement of ensuring value for money is central in claiming for accommodation, goods or services – Members should avoid purchases which could be seen as extravagant or luxurious. * Claims must be supported by documentary evidence, except where the House has agreed that such evidence is not necessary. Applying the principles In the majority of cases, the application of these principles will be straightforward. But the role of Members is constantly evolving and different Members have different needs, priorities and ways of performing their duties. Therefore there will always be areas of uncertainty and the need to exercise individual judgement. The following questions are designed to assist Members in coming to a decision about whether or not costs incurred are appropriate to be met from the allowances: * Is this expense genuinely incurred by me in my role as a Member of Parliament as opposed to my personal capacity? * Is this purchase supporting me in carrying out my parliamentary duties? Anything which is done for personal benefit will not be part of a Member's parliamentary duties. * Does the claim match the purpose of the allowance in question as set out later in the Green Book? * Could the claim in any way damage the reputation of Parliament or its Members? * How comfortable do I feel with the knowledge that my claim will be available to the public under Freedom of Information? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ None of the above is ‘new’ to 2009; previous editions of the Green Book are almost identical. So judge for yourself how the ‘system’ or how the ‘Fees Office’ can be to blame?
great post, great to see some intelligent and well thought out arguments for once on this God forsaken hole of a site.

Mr. Kipling, Hove says...
3:45pm Mon 1 Jun 09

jyan wrote:
"£540 for gardening, and £520 for removing a shed from her new garden and getting rid of unwanted concrete. "

That's a ridiculous amount of money spent on those items alone! How are gardening, removing an unwanted shed and concrete legitimate expenses? The thieving cow must be looking for a new job very soon.
£540 for gardening. What`s wrong with getting a trowel and a shovel and doing it yourself once a week? Certainly wouldn`t cost £540.

£520 for removing a shed?
Ever heard of Freecycle?

Concrete removal?
Any building firm would take it away for nothing to use as Hardcore.


Comments are closed on this article.

COMMENT: Celia Barlow FLIPPING: Celia Barlow

Local Advertisers

Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »