We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Council evictions begin
Comments
-
-
You better back that up with some links then
You may or may not have said it specifically. But on a thread talking about accidental landlords, and the ease they have of evicting tenants when they want their house back, the only thing you could do is come up with a tax free solution for te accidental landlord.
Would you support tougher eviction rules for BTL landlords? I.e. they couldn't evict them, even if they were known theives, arsonists etc?
At the moment, they can evict them, and do, just for being pregnant, or having a dog.
You don't have to specifically state something when you are thanking others for their posts on BTL evictions.0 -
dawyldthing wrote: »Personally i think they should pay for the damage with community service based on them working in their spare time based on minimum wage for things in the community (will replace a gap from the funds cuts), so those who stole 4500 pounds worth of goods would need to do 759 hours back into the community in their own time. It might act as a deterent if they don't have spare time and need things to occupy their time thats constructive.
They should pay with at least treble those hours. stealing £4500 worth of goods and only paying back that amount in community service will not act as a deterent.0 -
It's absolutely right that circumstances should determine sentances;
there is no absolute rules or logic that should determine the 'correct' sentance (if there is then please explain how that works)
if one get a sudden explosion of a particular crime that for whatever reason becomes 'poplular', then it's absolutley logic and necessary to discourage such behaviour by exemplary sentances
In that case it would make sense to give drug dealers some mighty long sentences as their chosen profession seems to have increased crime exponentially. I am not sure it happens though.'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »You may or may not have said it specifically. But on a thread talking about accidental landlords, and the ease they have of evicting tenants when they want their house back, the only thing you could do is come up with a tax free solution for te accidental landlord.
Would you support tougher eviction rules for BTL landlords? I.e. they couldn't evict them, even if they were known theives, arsonists etc?
At the moment, they can evict them, and do, just for being pregnant, or having a dog.
You don't have to specifically state something when you are thanking others for their posts on BTL evictions.
Thanks for the somewhat muted apology BTW was has tax relief on renting out primary residence got to do with kicking people out on the street? 'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
It's absolutely right that circumstances should determine sentances;
there is no absolute rules or logic that should determine the 'correct' sentance (if there is then please explain how that works)
I have just chanced upon a new toy when I was seeking out the sentencing guidlines, a bit fun and informative.
http://ybtj.cjsonline.gov.uk/'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
In that case it would make sense to give drug dealers some mighty long sentences as their chosen profession seems to have increased crime exponentially. I am not sure it happens though.
And noone would argue against it. Happens in the US, most of the founders of the biggest drug gangs have been arrested and executed already.Faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.0 -
The person(s) that reared/brought up/dragged up/mentored/guided/ the child until they reached adulthood does have some responsibility.
Or with someone like Osborne, the nanny would probably get the blame
It's the same the whole world over It's the poor what gets the blame It's the rich what gets the pleasure Ain't it all a bloomin' shame?'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards