Best Of

We have been warned:


Zia Yusuf

@ZiaYusufUK
·
7h
Reform will transform the civil service from a bloated, failed organisation hostile to the interests of the British people into a lean, performant machine that makes our country proud. 🇬🇧

On the face of it, this doesn't sound like anything to be worried about. What do you see as problematic with it?

The risk is the criteria will involve a politicisation of the civil service

Honestly it can't be worse than what we have today.

For example, my dad is executor for his best friend's will, he died a year or so ago. The estate value was barely over the IHT limit, the tax is all paid and yet a year later the probate office is still in jobsworth mode asking for the original will, even though multiple copies have been provided, they had the original previously and have sent it back but for whatever reason they need it again.

This is a tiny, tiny bit of officialdom needed for a nothing size estate where the tax has already all been paid and yet the probate office, the state, is making nonsense paperwork and hassle for my dad as executor and the beneficiaries who still can't close the book on the death of their father.

In what world is this a good job? How have the civil servants in the probate office helped anyone with their nonsense bureaucracy in this instance? Who benefits from them not just getting it done, there isn't going to be some mad revelation which means the estate will suddenly be worth 10x more and loads of tax will be payable. It's this kind of shit that's causing the nation to slow down, these useless bureaucrats sticking their noses in to justify their jobs and pensions and making life miserable for ordinary people.

Get rid of them all I say, 50% cuts in the bureaucracy and stop interfering in people's lives.

As I mentioned a couple of weeks back I'm going through this as executor for my own father. I expect to encounter much state stupidity along the way, including I am told a wait of 16 weeks from submission to probate being granted.

Today I've had a letter from the DWP. It says "yes, we owe the estate some money, please tell us where to send it along with a probate letter".

Except nowhere in the letter does it state a how much they owe. A number which I need in order to obtain said probate.

So, I will have to ring them up, and ask them to send another letter. At which point they will no doubt demand several reams of paperwork to prove I am permitted to see said value. Why not just send everything needed the first time? Even Yorkshire Water, yes, Yorkshire Water managed that.

I can of course calculate it roughly myself - approximately 1 week of state pension, a trivial amount in the grand scheme of things - but HMRC will want the exact figure in writing so that they can claim their 40%.

Ho hum. At least I'm not paying for a solicitor to chase this up (yet).

Is it any wonder I'm thinking of giving enough away to stop the government getting a penny?

FPT but from my experience it is perfectly acceptable to use estimated figures for the probate if you are held up on stuff, especially chickenfeed stuff, like this. Thje figures have to be stated as explicitly estimated. This is a godsend with stuff that is dragging on, especially small stuff. But do check the instructions on your probate paperwork (different for Scotland IIRC).

Plus stuff crops up even months or years after probate. Some is completely unexpected. E.g. my late mother had bought shares in the RBS flotation that caused all the trouble, and was paid compo years after her demise; she had life assurance policies on my dad's life which didn't pay out till he died a decade later; and it turned out that one life assurance company had underpaid by 14K, and so on - I only found out when it occurred to me when doing the final wrap up that the rate of return was suspiciously low ... so I didn't finally settle her estate (I think!) for 10 years after probate.

The main thing, as I understand it, is that HMRC get a sufficiently detailed probate valuation up front to assess whether IHT is liable or not and, if so, to get their chunk before anyone else does.

If there is no IHT payable, it's up to the executor to tell them if enough dosh comes in later to change the figures upward enough to hit the magic IHT level.

If IHT turns out to have been overpaid - usually if a house sells for less than the probate valuation - then you can claim the overpaid IHT back.

Edit: I forget HMRC's wording when they accept the proibate, but they basically say"okay, you've signed this, and that's done, but you have to let us know if anything happens to change the levels of tax due"

Guardian's list of runners in deputy leader race is a bit white and middle class. I can't see the members being happy, understandably as it suggests McSweeney has total control.

I am non white, perhaps I should become Labour's deputy leader?

Nobody cares about class, people with class do not talk about class and well...

I am running to be Deputy Leader of @UKLabour.

As a proud working-class woman from the North East, I have come from a tough council street all the way to the Cabinet.

I will be a strong voice to unite our Party, take the fight to Reform, and deliver for our country.

https://x.com/bphillipsonMP/status/1965310226565095448

A 'council street' isn't really a thing. All streets are council streets (except unadopted ones). Does she mean a council estate? The implication is that some of her neighbours lived in council houses but she didn't.

Guardian's list of runners in deputy leader race is a bit white and middle class. I can't see the members being happy, understandably as it suggests McSweeney has total control.

I am non white, perhaps I should become Labour's deputy leader?

Nobody cares about class, people with class do not talk about class and well...

I am running to be Deputy Leader of @UKLabour.

As a proud working-class woman from the North East, I have come from a tough council street all the way to the Cabinet.

I will be a strong voice to unite our Party, take the fight to Reform, and deliver for our country.

https://x.com/bphillipsonMP/status/1965310226565095448

Yes but do you put your lipstick on too thick?

Re. the discussion in the last thread, the Probate Officer will be employed by HM Courts and Tribunal Service i.e. the most well known under-funded part of public life in the last 20 years. It isn’t the “civil service” as is commonly understood.

Isn't it? That's how I understood the "civil service"!

I was puzzled on the last thread by a complaint that a government service was slow and therefore the solution proposed was to cut staff. How is that going to make the service better?

Coz they will be terrified they’ll be the next to go in the next round of cuts. Put the fear of god in them

Give them hard targets to meet and if they don’t meet them - gone

This is the new £350m for the NHS delusion.

The YG poll is both intriguing and frustrating.

Are greens really on 12%? They’ve had a bit of news coverage because of Polanski. Perhaps the hard left vote is consolidating around them given the ongoing will they won’t they with Corbyn and Sultana.

Why can’t the Lib Dems ever overtake the Tories, even just for one poll? We seem to move in concert with them between pollsters. Perhaps because both voter groups are now demographically similar?

The difference between Reform on 27% and Reform on 33% is vast in terms of FPTP seats. What is YG doing in its sampling that’s so different from so many others?

I’ve not looked at this specific poll but in their recent polls they have a tendency to down weight 2024 non voters which is where a substantial chunk of Reform’s support comes from, other pollsters are a bit more generous.

Before our low IQ posters smear YouGov this is a policy YouGov has followed since their founding in 2000 because outside of plebiscites non voters do not turn out to vote.

GE 2024’s low turnout should be considered when factoring in non voters this time; a lot of 2019 Tories stayed at home and I’d expect the majority of them to be saying they’d vote refute now. I doubt they be habitual non voters

If it’s a policy YG have followed since their foundation, there’s no need to look at this specific poll. We have the answer for YG finding lower Reform scores

These are habitual non voters, the last time this lost voted was in 2016 and haven’t voted in general elections since probably 2001/05.

Hang on, are you saying YouGov are down-weighting those who didn't vote in 2019 and 2024 rather than just 2024. There are no guarantees with turnout, but pollsters need to be careful with looking at 2024 turnout.

Starmer apparently calling his party the 'Patriots' and Farage is a plastic Patriot

Why does he continue to mimic Farage and the right ?

Because he doesn’t want to give the right total ownership of the patriot vote. It’s pretty simple really.

Because he is doing it in the most pathetic "plastic union jack hat" manner. Which puts off his existing voters and puts off everyone else.

Attlee was undeniably patriotic - as much so as Churchill - maybe take a gander at how he did that. It was policies based on inner beliefs. It wasn't by subcontracting his conscience to the Law Lords....

I’ll put you down as a maybe

The YG poll is both intriguing and frustrating.

Are greens really on 12%? They’ve had a bit of news coverage because of Polanski. Perhaps the hard left vote is consolidating around them given the ongoing will they won’t they with Corbyn and Sultana.

Why can’t the Lib Dems ever overtake the Tories, even just for one poll? We seem to move in concert with them between pollsters. Perhaps because both voter groups are now demographically similar?

The difference between Reform on 27% and Reform on 33% is vast in terms of FPTP seats. What is YG doing in its sampling that’s so different from so many others?

I’ve not looked at this specific poll but in their recent polls they have a tendency to down weight 2024 non voters which is where a substantial chunk of Reform’s support comes from, other pollsters are a bit more generous.

Before our low IQ posters smear YouGov this is a policy YouGov has followed since their founding in 2000 because outside of plebiscites non voters do not turn out to vote.

GE 2024’s low turnout should be considered when factoring in non voters this time; a lot of 2019 Tories stayed at home and I’d expect the majority of them to be saying they’d vote refute now. I doubt they be habitual non voters

If it’s a policy YG have followed since their foundation, there’s no need to look at this specific poll. We have the answer for YG finding lower Reform scores

This is a very good point.