He knows that would
stop a Labour Party getting into Power
so he is just another angry back bencher

NOTHING in the above response addresses any of my post and it merely shows that you have completely missed the points which I was making.

Of which I will cover below, after I have pointed out what I believe to be very, very cleverly executed misrepresentations in your response of what I ACTUALLY stated in my post:

"As for your deceitful tenant, what has she got to do with Corbyn? Does Mays government allow sitting tenants or not? Does Mays government have landlords spending hundreds to get rid of sitting tenants or not?"

I NEVER stated anywhere that my tenant was a 'sitting tenant' because she is NOT.

However, a 'sitting tenant' is a lot more of an 'emotive' term which is highly likely to impress upon any 'unknowing' reader that I am callously trying to evict a very long-standing tenant who has been in the property for years when it used in an eviction scenario.

I am not a 'Landlord spending hundreds of pounds to 'GET RID' of a 'sitting tenant' - I am a landlord paying hundreds of pounds to EVICT a scumbag who owes me £5,000 in UNPAID RENT when she RECEIVES BENEFITS (Tax-Payers MONEY) with which to PAY that rent.

"Its not only benefit claimants who sit tight when they can't pay the rent and get an eviction order."

I have never stated ANYWHERE that this is a 'benefits claimant who sit(s) tight' because she 'CAN'T pay the rent'

I stated that this is a benefit claiming tenant who has FULL benefits coming in but WON'T pay any rent because she elects to SELFISHLY live the 'High Life' with all that Tax Payers money instead.

THERE IS NOT MUCH DIFFERENCE IN MEANING BETEEN WHAT YOU REPRESENT THAT I SAID AND WHAT I ACTUALLY DID SAY IS THERE?

" But lets go back to benefit claimants and what they presently have to put up with re-subsidized government rent.

1. The government no longer pays deposits. I believe that was stopped in 2008
2. The government are notoriously slow at paying up and when they do pay up, they pay the tenanat and not the landlord. Again I believe this happened in 2008.
3. The government just stop payments without notice and for very little reason.
4. Government payments are always in arrears.
5. Since 2014 the government makes landlords jump through hoops of fire before they can let to people on benefit. All these rules are confusing and time consuming and leave the landlord feeling vulnerable.
Its the Tory government that have done this, not Corbyn."


NONE of the above has ANY relevance to my post at all - though you are misinformed regarding some of the listed 'facts'.

This tenant was receiving only a fraction of Housing Benefits because her WAGE, WORKING TAX CREDIT and other benefits virtually reached the stipulated 'Income Ceiling' for qualifying for Housing Benefits.

In other words, she was NOT a poor struggling 'under-privileged' person but enjoyed a GOOD level of income.

SHE and SHE alone was responsible for paying her rent to' keep a roof over hers and her two childrens' heads' - NOT the Housing Benefits.

Instead, she made buying expensive items, make-up, clothes and going out drinking to far-flung places on stay-away weekend jaunts her priorities.

My point is, that as flawed as the status quo is now in respect of the law concerning Tenants/Landlords, and as severe as the Housing Crisis is now, it will ALL be a hell of a lot worse if Comrade Corbyn secures the Premiership, because if the type of tenant whom I have addressed here CANNOT be found 'Social' housing now, then what will happen when the THOUSANDS more just like her (and there IS that many, believe me) start being evicted en-masse by Landlords who are 'Selling Up' or stopping renting to Benefit Tenants altogether to protect themselves from Corbyn's stated policies - of which COMPULSORY DISCOUNTED PURCHASE is just one?

Reminds me of some cases on ‘If you can’t pay’ - there are lots of irresponsible, selfish and dishonest tenants out there and for some to automatically make assumptions and try to present their view that the landlord is likely the ‘bad guy’ and the tenant the ‘victim’ is absurd. I have said it before and I say it again - AGENDAS.

It's current believe it or not... it made the papers today! :laugh:

Stop baiting, DR clearly stated had you bothered to read that she too owns property.

In your haste to blow kirks horn you missed that.

And you stop trying to shut people down by accusing them of baiting especially as you have been accused of it many times.

Whether or not she owns property too is irrelevant. Her post was unnecessarily attacking of another poster and a lot of assumptions were made in my opinion. If I wish to comment on that I don’t need your permission.

Ok she was a tenant sitting in your property refusing to pay rent. You didn't say she trashed the place to the value of £5,000 (which you called arrears) and you did say you had to have her evicted and we all know how long that can take.

No but you did say she received Working Tax Credits and Benefits and at the end of your post you made it clear that you would not accept anyone else who was on benefits which probably confused things as her benefits claims was just something that annoyed you but had no reflection on her not paying her dues.
Sounds like she was just a greedy high living hussy. People don't have to be on benefits to fit that sort of personality.

When you type in capitals it doesn't come across any louder but as this was an obvious attempt to tell me off, I'll just say that I don't have a clue what you're saying here ^ and perhaps its because you claimed you would never take anyone on benefits again. The thing is, benefits was never the problem, the tenants attitude towards money was the problem. I also don't see what any of this has to do with Corbyn?

Thank you. Perhaps you should of said this in your initial post.

FFS Kirk and me are having a conversation. A heated one yes but a conversation never the less. I'm not attacking Kirk!!

You are not the forum police... how is it your place to shut DRs comment down if I can't refer to yours?
Double standard there.

Well you are certainly over reacting now. I gave my opinion like you and everyone else does on a forum and will continue to do so.

You haven't answered this which is no surprise to me as you ignore a lot that doesn't suit you to reply to. I guess you also just ignore the links I post (those links which you deny exist) even though I have posted them many times in conversation with you.
Ignoring and denying and diverting is a speciality which Corbyn fanatics have had to attempt to perfect given how dodgy and unpalatable he is. It doesn't work though because those tactics are so transparent.

I've seen the links, I didn't see anything particularly troubling, I'm at a loss to see what you feel is so damning!
He wanted justice for those wrongfully arrested and he got it they were released and pardoned :/

Oh you admit now that you read the links when you previously said all I responded to when asked was my own personal experiences....what I asked was why you said that when you knew it wasn't true?

....and of course you wouldn't see anything which clearly and without doubt shows he was an IRA supporter because when it comes to Corbyn you have no objectivity at all.

No, you used the word attack and I consider that childish and unnecessary. People here are allowed to strongly debate and call people out; that's what debate is for. If you want to take every disagreement as a personal slight on your character that's up to you but Kirk isn't a victim and doesn't need you to defend him. He's more than capable of looking after himself.

Kizzy mark 2. :smug:

Your personal experience/view on the issues relating to NI, let's not forget however that once again Corbyn was RIGHT! you might not like it and at the time it might have appeared massively controversial I would have thought though that since time has vindicated him there be some objectivity from yourself as to this?

I don’t need your permission on who I can or can’t agree with thanks.

How have I taken a personal slant on my character - that makes no sense. Kirk is more than capable of defending himself - no-one in their right minds would doubt that. I think it is you taking things as a personal slight so I would appreciate it if you didn’t attempt to project that onto me.

Default setting set to bait eh Jet? :smug:

Wow she was attacking kirk and now you?... I'd have a sit down DR you must be exhausted from all these attacks :/

Give it up Kizzy. Those who live in glass houses ... :rolleyes:

You have once again avoided the question I asked.

Here's another one: How was Corbyn vindicated as a long time IRA supporter? Evidence?

Nope she was trying to project her insecurities onto me.

I remind you of Kizzy. You remind me of Brillo... strange that innit!!

If I wasn't amused by all this I'd be asleep Kizzy :joker:

Sleep tight.