Would you claim expenses of 3p if you could?

[LeMaquis]

What on earth can you purchase for 3p these days?

 

Enough petrol to get you 100 yards.

 

---------- Post added 06-10-2013 at 18:09 ----------

 

What can you buy for a quid these days?

 

Enough petrol to get you 100 yards 33.33 times.

[purdy]

You'd think his office would have picked it up, it's just the kind of thing the tabloids love.

 

What about Mr. & Mrs. Balls then :"The hardline socialist husband-and-wife shadow cabinet team have been referred to the parliamentary standards watchdog after they claimed for reimbursement of 375 journeys for their three children between 2007 and 2010."

 

"Because they are both MPs they are able to claim twice as much as a single MP with a family."

 

They also flipped homes 3 times during the expenses scandal.

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/233033/Probe-into-Ed-Balls-14k-expenses-for-children

 

Nothing mps do surprises me anymore.

 

It's a story that's made up anyhow. If you work in an office you will have a petty cash float which needs to be accounted for. So if you or the office staff take money to buy anything they need to stick in a receipt so the float balances even if that is 1p.

[Jeffrey Shaw]

The song in 'Mary Poppins' offered to sell birdseed at tuppence a bag- so the 3p. would fund a bag and a half.

[ANGELFIRE1]

You'd think his office would have picked it up, it's just the kind of thing the tabloids love.

 

What about Mr. & Mrs. Balls then :"The hardline socialist husband-and-wife shadow cabinet team have been referred to the parliamentary standards watchdog after they claimed for reimbursement of 375 journeys for their three children between 2007 and 2010."

 

"Because they are both MPs they are able to claim twice as much as a single MP with a family."

 

They also flipped homes 3 times during the expenses scandal.

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/233033/Probe-into-Ed-Balls-14k-expenses-for-children

 

Nothing mps do surprises me anymore.

 

 

While I agree with the above, the two Parasites concerned have not actually broken the rules it seems. " contravention of the spirit of the rules as set out in the latest edition of the Green Book.” So there it is in black and white, only the Spirit of the rules broken, so they are innocent . Besides they are now at the top of the Government ladder, to high to be prosecuted unlike the man in the street.

 

I remember a female red headed MP of small stature who somehow avoided prosecution for house flipping as well. " In May 2009 The Telegraph reported that Blears had claimed the maximum allowable expenses, within one pound, for three properties, as well as for stays in hotels, £4,874 on furniture, £899 on a new bed and £913 on a new TV, the second such TV in under a year, and the maximum £400 a month in groceries. Further, Blears had not paid capital gains tax on profit from the sale of a London flat. The property was registered as her main residence with HM Revenue and Customs, but Blears had been claiming MPs' second home expenses relating to the flat. She had made a £45,000 profit on its sale without paying capital gains tax. On 12 May she volunteered to pay the £13,332 capital gains tax she had avoided on the sale of her 'second home. It was subsequently claimed that Gordon Brown had ordered her to repay the sum. The Daily Mail printed allegations that Blears 'flipped' her homes in London three times in one year. Flipping is the practice of switching which of two or more properties is designated an MP's second home. This allowed her to maximise her taxpayer-funded allowances. "

 

Then they tell us they are all honest, aye about as honest as a second hand car dealer.

 

Angel.

[Happ Hazzard]

Take care of the pennies and the pounds take care of themselves.

[Jeffrey Shaw]

Take care of the pennies and the pounds take care of themselves.

OR

'Take care to pay over the pounds- and the MPs take them, themselves."

[nightrider]

What on earth can you purchase for 3p these days?

 

I think its the mileage allowance for driving his car 100 yards....

 

---------- Post added 09-10-2013 at 16:09 ----------

 

I do claim because I would object to subsidising my employer. ll thThere are things I could claim for e.g. telephone calls and newspapers if I stay away overnight, but I don't because I never ring anyone and usually there are free papers in the hotel.

 

I put my claims through each month and alongside the hotels, train tickets etc I also claim all the 80ps and £2s and bits and pieces. It's no more work for me because they all go on the same form. I suspect that's what happened here - they just claimed for everything and nobody thought to question the 3p,.

 

in the picture of the claim from in the article it does not look like thats what he does. There is a claim for a total of 24 pence, so its not just lumped in with a load of stuff on a trip - he actually claimed for a 24 pence trip.

[Cyclone]

I do claim because I would object to subsidising my employer. ll thThere are things I could claim for e.g. telephone calls and newspapers if I stay away overnight, but I don't because I never ring anyone and usually there are free papers in the hotel.

 

I put my claims through each month and alongside the hotels, train tickets etc I also claim all the 80ps and £2s and bits and pieces. It's no more work for me because they all go on the same form. I suspect that's what happened here - they just claimed for everything and nobody thought to question the 3p,.

 

Same here, it all adds up. Why would you exclude 100 yards driven (why you'd drive it is a different question)?

[barleycorn]

Same here, it all adds up. Why would you exclude 100 yards driven (why you'd drive it is a different question)?

 

I suspect his sat nav automatically logs all journeys and that the 3p journey was only part of a longer itinerary for the day i.e. if you have several places to visit each leg of the journey will be logged separately.

 

jb