0215 Hrs ['Bank Holiday'] Monday London 4 May 2009
http://www.mortgagestrategy.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=185606&d=403&h=401&f=402
FSA BANS EAST LONDON MORTGAGE BROKER FOR FRAUD
Natalie Martin
30-Apr-2009
Send to a colleague
Print details
Add your comment
The Financial Services Authority has banned Tower Hamlets based mortgage adviser Zia Chowdhury for certifying client identities for fraudulent mortgage applications.
He also operated his firm Express Financial without being approved by the FSA as required.
Jonathan Phelan, head of retail enforcement at the FSA, says: "Mr Chowdhury’s actions posed a serious risk to lenders. Our crackdown on mortgage fraud is gathering pace – we have banned more than 40 mortgage brokers over the last two years, and we will continue to ban people who become involved in mortgage fraud, in order to stamp out this behaviour.”
The FSA found that Chowdhury certified client identity documents accompanying five fraudulent mortgage applications as true copies of the originals without seeing the original documents or meeting the clients.
He also submitted the mortgage applications in circumstances in which he must have suspected that false information might have been used or that the individuals who referred the applications might be involved in mortgage fraud; and knowingly carried out controlled functions at Express Financial without being approved.
Monday, 4 May 2009
How the Guardian has been building up an image of the "Baroness of Bethnal Green". So much talent. So little.......
0110 Hrs London Monday 4 May 2009
Frm the Guaradin web site:
Comment is free
We need all kinds of women in politics
National representation of minority ethnic women is nowhere near what it should be – we must open the political door to them
Comments (63)
Pola Uddin
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 31 March 2009 15.30 BST
Article history
When I entered the House of Lords 11 years ago, there was no fanfare, no acclaim at being the first Muslim female peer, or even acknowledgement of my work in the London borough of Tower Hamlets. Rather, all the coverage centred on what value I could possibly add to the House as a woman who wore a sari and breast-fed her son in the female peers room. In fact, I was advised by my peers and so-called friends that I may wish to consider wearing a suit to be taken seriously.
So, did my appointment to the Lords herald a sea-change in female minority representation, or even an acceptance that women of colour could potentially add value and insight to governing institutions? The current situation suggests not.
National representation of minority ethnic women is nowhere near what it should be, but this comes as no surprise when local government – a breeding ground for many an aspiring politician – remains staunchly middle-aged, pale and male, unlike our society at large.
Whilst the number of female councillors has risen, from 27% in 1997 to the current level of 31%, for minority ethnic women the situation appears to be deteriorating. There are now only around 149 female councillors from ethnic minority backgrounds out of nearly 20,000 nationally, a fall from 2006. I find it alarming and disappointing that minority ethnic women represent less than 1% of all councillors despite making up more than 5% of the population.
I had hoped times had changed since the 1980s and 90s when I was a councillor. Back then there was a prevailing view that Asian women were too much of a political risk and were too family-orientated to dedicate sufficient time to the needs of their constituents. Strangely I managed to juggle a husband, five kids including one with autism, and my responsibilities as a councillor. I'm no superwoman, I was just underestimated.
What's even more frustrating is that opposition comes not only from traditional sources such as the old boys' network, a predictable enemy. I know of many women who have encountered fierce criticism and alienation from those you would expect to be their biggest cheerleaders – their family members and local community. A fellow member of my Taskforce and Respect party leader, Salma Yaqoob, even received death threats from an extremist group.
As Muslim women we'll always have to balance along this thin line of dual identity – either being questioned about dress code that instantly labels us "too Muslim, therefore potentially disloyal", or that we've sold out and become "white and middle class". Hearing these comments makes you realise that those who want to come forward to serve publicly have their work cut out for them – they're damned if they do and damned if they don't. The reality is that we need their contribution and colourful opinions and we need women, with children, with disabilities, with saris and hijab – we need everyone.
It's plain to see that for minority women it's not a question of hitting a glass ceiling – many of these women simply can't get through the door. I have been called as a witness at today's Speaker's Conference in parliament, where I will be answering questions on what can be done to rectify the under-representation of women, minority women and the disabled in parliament and society at large. And maybe, just maybe, we can slowly inch that door open.
Frm the Guaradin web site:
Comment is free
We need all kinds of women in politics
National representation of minority ethnic women is nowhere near what it should be – we must open the political door to them
Comments (63)
Pola Uddin
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 31 March 2009 15.30 BST
Article history
When I entered the House of Lords 11 years ago, there was no fanfare, no acclaim at being the first Muslim female peer, or even acknowledgement of my work in the London borough of Tower Hamlets. Rather, all the coverage centred on what value I could possibly add to the House as a woman who wore a sari and breast-fed her son in the female peers room. In fact, I was advised by my peers and so-called friends that I may wish to consider wearing a suit to be taken seriously.
So, did my appointment to the Lords herald a sea-change in female minority representation, or even an acceptance that women of colour could potentially add value and insight to governing institutions? The current situation suggests not.
National representation of minority ethnic women is nowhere near what it should be, but this comes as no surprise when local government – a breeding ground for many an aspiring politician – remains staunchly middle-aged, pale and male, unlike our society at large.
Whilst the number of female councillors has risen, from 27% in 1997 to the current level of 31%, for minority ethnic women the situation appears to be deteriorating. There are now only around 149 female councillors from ethnic minority backgrounds out of nearly 20,000 nationally, a fall from 2006. I find it alarming and disappointing that minority ethnic women represent less than 1% of all councillors despite making up more than 5% of the population.
I had hoped times had changed since the 1980s and 90s when I was a councillor. Back then there was a prevailing view that Asian women were too much of a political risk and were too family-orientated to dedicate sufficient time to the needs of their constituents. Strangely I managed to juggle a husband, five kids including one with autism, and my responsibilities as a councillor. I'm no superwoman, I was just underestimated.
What's even more frustrating is that opposition comes not only from traditional sources such as the old boys' network, a predictable enemy. I know of many women who have encountered fierce criticism and alienation from those you would expect to be their biggest cheerleaders – their family members and local community. A fellow member of my Taskforce and Respect party leader, Salma Yaqoob, even received death threats from an extremist group.
As Muslim women we'll always have to balance along this thin line of dual identity – either being questioned about dress code that instantly labels us "too Muslim, therefore potentially disloyal", or that we've sold out and become "white and middle class". Hearing these comments makes you realise that those who want to come forward to serve publicly have their work cut out for them – they're damned if they do and damned if they don't. The reality is that we need their contribution and colourful opinions and we need women, with children, with disabilities, with saris and hijab – we need everyone.
It's plain to see that for minority women it's not a question of hitting a glass ceiling – many of these women simply can't get through the door. I have been called as a witness at today's Speaker's Conference in parliament, where I will be answering questions on what can be done to rectify the under-representation of women, minority women and the disabled in parliament and society at large. And maybe, just maybe, we can slowly inch that door open.
http://www.euronews24.org/united-kingdom/peer-denies-%A3100000-expenses-claim/
http://www.euronews24.org/united-kingdom/peer-denies-%A3100000-expenses-claim/
Newspaper reports said Baroness Uddin registered the two-bedroom flat in Maidstone, Kent, as her main home, even though she lived a few miles away from Westminster in a house in Wapping, east London.
The reports said the arrangement meant she was able to able to claim the controversial parliamentary second home allowance on the Wapping property.
Neighbours were quoted as saying that nobody lived in the Maidstone flat and it was not even furnished.
MP Angus Robertson, the leader of the at Westminster, said he would now be asking both the police and the House of Lords authorities to investigate the allegations.
Lady Uddin, who became Britain's first woman Muslim peer in 1998, said in a solicitor's statement: I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules. Should the relevant House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, co-operate fully.
The statement added: The Wapping house is rented, while I own the property in Maidstone. The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it.
Newspaper reports said Baroness Uddin registered the two-bedroom flat in Maidstone, Kent, as her main home, even though she lived a few miles away from Westminster in a house in Wapping, east London.
The reports said the arrangement meant she was able to able to claim the controversial parliamentary second home allowance on the Wapping property.
Neighbours were quoted as saying that nobody lived in the Maidstone flat and it was not even furnished.
MP Angus Robertson, the leader of the at Westminster, said he would now be asking both the police and the House of Lords authorities to investigate the allegations.
Lady Uddin, who became Britain's first woman Muslim peer in 1998, said in a solicitor's statement: I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules. Should the relevant House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, co-operate fully.
The statement added: The Wapping house is rented, while I own the property in Maidstone. The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it.
Sunday, 3 May 2009
Shocking event! the Guardian actually says that a "Labour peer” COULD be in the wrong! "Baroness Bethnal Green" facing investigation...
Baroness Uddin faces inquiry calls over second home fees
Allegra Stratton
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 3 May 2009 19.55 BST
Article history
The Labour peer Baroness Uddin today became the latest politician accused of distorting their expenses after claiming £100,000 from the taxpayer for a flat neighbours said had been unoccupied for years.
Uddin reportedly told parliamentary authorities that a two-bedroom flat in Maidstone, Kent, which she bought four years ago was her main residence, allowing her to claim the allowance for a second home allocated to parliamentarians who live outside commuting distance of the capital.
All five neighbours of the peer's Maidstone flat insist the property has been vacant for years while Uddin has continued to live in Wapping, east London, four miles from Westminster. The Sunday Times alleged that Uddin has claimed £30,000 a year to pay for the Maidstone flat and that the family house in east London, where her children went to school, is her "second home".
Uddin became Labour's first female Muslim peer in 1998 and has lived in the three-bedroom house in Wapping since 1993. In contrast, a plumber who recently visited the Maidstone property after Uddin's son asked him to check the boiler, reported that the central heating appeared not to have been working for a "long time". He said: "I've been in more flats than I care to remember, but this place looked like someone had left it ages ago. It was very dusty."
Uddin said the property was a "fully furnished home".
Moshahidur Rahman, who lives next door to Uddin's flat in Maidstone, said: "I would recognise Baroness Uddin in an instant, I've seen her on TV many times. She is very well known in the Bangladeshi community.
"I can't believe Baroness Uddin owns that place. I didn't think anyone lived there. I thought she lived in London. I've never met her."
Tonight Angus Robertson, the leader in Westminster of the Scottish National party, which has campaigned for stricter controls on expenses, said he wanted two inquiries into the baroness's expense claims.
"I will be writing to the police and the House of Lords authorities asking them to investigate this report," he said.
Lord Oakeshott, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman in the Lords, said: "An empty property can't be a peer's main residence. The Lords authorities must check the facts of this case and investigate."
Uddin said: "Should the House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, co-operate fully." She said she stayed at the flat "regularly" and that it had furniture.
The fresh allegations will annoy Gordon Brown, who 10 days ago moved to expedite reforms to the second home allowance by announcing on YouTube plans to introduce a flat-rate of daily expenses for attending parliament. The prime minister was forced to drop that plan four days later after a significant group of Labour backbenchers joined with Conservatives and Liberal Democrats to threaten a parliamentary defeat and the motion was removed from last Thursday's schedule of votes.
Allegra Stratton
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 3 May 2009 19.55 BST
Article history
The Labour peer Baroness Uddin today became the latest politician accused of distorting their expenses after claiming £100,000 from the taxpayer for a flat neighbours said had been unoccupied for years.
Uddin reportedly told parliamentary authorities that a two-bedroom flat in Maidstone, Kent, which she bought four years ago was her main residence, allowing her to claim the allowance for a second home allocated to parliamentarians who live outside commuting distance of the capital.
All five neighbours of the peer's Maidstone flat insist the property has been vacant for years while Uddin has continued to live in Wapping, east London, four miles from Westminster. The Sunday Times alleged that Uddin has claimed £30,000 a year to pay for the Maidstone flat and that the family house in east London, where her children went to school, is her "second home".
Uddin became Labour's first female Muslim peer in 1998 and has lived in the three-bedroom house in Wapping since 1993. In contrast, a plumber who recently visited the Maidstone property after Uddin's son asked him to check the boiler, reported that the central heating appeared not to have been working for a "long time". He said: "I've been in more flats than I care to remember, but this place looked like someone had left it ages ago. It was very dusty."
Uddin said the property was a "fully furnished home".
Moshahidur Rahman, who lives next door to Uddin's flat in Maidstone, said: "I would recognise Baroness Uddin in an instant, I've seen her on TV many times. She is very well known in the Bangladeshi community.
"I can't believe Baroness Uddin owns that place. I didn't think anyone lived there. I thought she lived in London. I've never met her."
Tonight Angus Robertson, the leader in Westminster of the Scottish National party, which has campaigned for stricter controls on expenses, said he wanted two inquiries into the baroness's expense claims.
"I will be writing to the police and the House of Lords authorities asking them to investigate this report," he said.
Lord Oakeshott, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman in the Lords, said: "An empty property can't be a peer's main residence. The Lords authorities must check the facts of this case and investigate."
Uddin said: "Should the House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, co-operate fully." She said she stayed at the flat "regularly" and that it had furniture.
The fresh allegations will annoy Gordon Brown, who 10 days ago moved to expedite reforms to the second home allowance by announcing on YouTube plans to introduce a flat-rate of daily expenses for attending parliament. The prime minister was forced to drop that plan four days later after a significant group of Labour backbenchers joined with Conservatives and Liberal Democrats to threaten a parliamentary defeat and the motion was removed from last Thursday's schedule of votes.
"Baroness" of "Bethnal Green" is reported by Channle 4 News as 'denying' the ££££££ allegations against her
2150 Hrs London Sunday 3 May 2009
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/peer+denies+100000+expenses+claim/3122862
Peer denies £100,000 expenses claim
Updated on 03 May 2009
Source ITN
A Labour peer is facing claims that she made £100,000 in expenses by listing an empty flat as her main home.
Newspaper reports said Baroness Uddin registered the two-bedroom flat in Maidstone, Kent, as her main home, even though she lived a few miles away from Westminster in a house in Wapping, east London.
The reports said the arrangement meant she was able to able to claim the controversial parliamentary second home allowance on the Wapping property.
Neighbours were quoted as saying that nobody lived in the Maidstone flat and it was not even furnished.
MP Angus Robertson, the leader of the Scottish National Party at Westminster, said he would now be asking both the police and the House of Lords authorities to investigate the allegations.
Lady Uddin, who became Britain's first woman Muslim peer in 1998, said in a solicitor's statement: "I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules. Should the relevant House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, co-operate fully."
The statement added: "The Wapping house is rented, while I own the property in Maidstone. The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it."
© Independent Television News Limited 2009. All rights reserved.
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/peer+denies+100000+expenses+claim/3122862
Peer denies £100,000 expenses claim
Updated on 03 May 2009
Source ITN
A Labour peer is facing claims that she made £100,000 in expenses by listing an empty flat as her main home.
Newspaper reports said Baroness Uddin registered the two-bedroom flat in Maidstone, Kent, as her main home, even though she lived a few miles away from Westminster in a house in Wapping, east London.
The reports said the arrangement meant she was able to able to claim the controversial parliamentary second home allowance on the Wapping property.
Neighbours were quoted as saying that nobody lived in the Maidstone flat and it was not even furnished.
MP Angus Robertson, the leader of the Scottish National Party at Westminster, said he would now be asking both the police and the House of Lords authorities to investigate the allegations.
Lady Uddin, who became Britain's first woman Muslim peer in 1998, said in a solicitor's statement: "I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules. Should the relevant House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, co-operate fully."
The statement added: "The Wapping house is rented, while I own the property in Maidstone. The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it."
© Independent Television News Limited 2009. All rights reserved.
EAST LONDON PRESS updater report on the "Baroness of Bethnal Green" 'making the news'
1815 Hrs London Sunday 3 May 2009
EAST LONDON PRESS updater report on the "Baroness of Bethnal Green" 'making the news':
The following item carried on the London Times web site together with 38 comments on the story, is published here for the records
"
From The Sunday Times
May 3, 2009
The deserted Kent flat that earned baroness £100,000
A ‘main home’ outside London meant Lady Uddin could claim £29,000 a year, but the neighbours tell Insight that nobody lived there
Insight
THE small two-bedroom apartment in a quiet corner of Maidstone had been a mystery to its neighbours for years.
As far as they could see, it had been vacant and unfurnished since the day it was bought. Nobody had ever attempted to let it. However, after darkness fell last Sunday night a BMW 4x4 entered the gated apartment block and parked outside the flat.
A neighbour saw four people, including two women in saris, apparently carrying something into the house. “They were there for about half an hour,” said a postman who lives next door but one to the flat. “They did take in something: it was either a television or a computer screen.” By the next morning thick curtains protected the two bedrooms that had been visible from the street, a light was on in the hallway and a striped mat had been placed outside the flat’s front door.
“I thought, ‘There’s a mat. Someone must have moved in’,” said Yvonne Adams, whose own front door is a few feet across the corridor. “No one’s been living there.”
RELATED LINKS
Tory buys flat round corner on expenses
Home Secretary faces inquiry over expenses
Geoff Hoon caught up in row over second home
What the neighbours did not know was that the property is owned by Baroness Uddin, 49, a Labour peer. She has designated the flat as her “main address” so she can claim almost £30,000 in accommodation expenses a year from the House of Lords while continuing to live in her London home.
The flurry of activity in the flat on Sunday night came after The Sunday Times had asked the baroness questions about her “main address” the previous day. Neighbours also report a brief visit by the same car the previous night.
Yesterday MPs and a peer called for a full investigation into the baroness’s expenses claims. She has received more than £100,000 (this figure includes an estimate for last year) since buying the Maidstone flat. She also claimed a further £83,000 for the same allowance from 2001, four years before she bought the flat.
Despite repeated questions, she has declined to discuss whether she actually owned or rented a main home outside London during this period.
Angus Robertson, the SNP’s leader in the Commons, said: “I will be writing to the House of Lords authorities and the police and asking them to investigate this report.”
Lord Oakeshott, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, said: “The system stinks. Peers should get a simple taxable daily rate instead of these allowances. An empty property can’t be a peer’s main residence. The Lords authorities must investigate.”
Born in Bangladesh, Manzila Pola Uddin came to Britain as a teenager and went on to become a community worker and social services officer while pursuing a political career that saw her rise to be deputy leader of Tower Hamlets borough council in the early 1990s.
She was made a peer by Tony Blair in 1998 and took the title “Baroness Uddin of Bethnal Green in our London Borough of Tower Hamlets”. Aged 38, she was the youngest woman in the Lords.
As a campaigner on women’s and ethnic minority issues she has become part of the new Labour establishment, befriending Cherie Blair. Her Facebook friends include the cabinet ministers Harriet Harman, Hazel Blears and David Miliband and Alastair Campbell, the former spin doctor.
However, she has never forgotten her roots. Her Facebook entry lists London as her home town and she has continued to work and live there. She and her family have resided in the same three-bedroom house in Wapping since the early 1990s.
A page entitled “my back-yard” on her personal website says: “I have a great sense of belonging to the East End which has been my home for over 30 years . . . it is where my professional and political career has taken shape, where my children have grown up, and also where I served as a local councillor for eight years.”
Yet she designated the family house in Tower Hamlets – where her children lived and went to school – as a “second home” and this allowed her to claim the cost of overnight accommodation in London.
The purpose of the allowance is explained in a House of Lords guidance note that says: “A member whose main residence is outside greater London and who maintains a residence in London for the purpose of attending sittings of the House may claim this allowance towards the cost of maintaining such a residence.”
In the Commons a “main residence” is considered to be the home where an MP spends most nights, but in the Lords there is no fixed definition. Mary Morgan, director of public information at the Lords, says: “A member will know what his main residence is. It’s where they live . . . For the purpose of claiming expenses, it’s where they travel to and from. There is no official definition.”
The Sunday Times began looking into Uddin’s expenses claims as part of an inquiry into peers who clock in to the House of Lords chamber briefly so as to claim overnight allowances. We photographed her going into the Lords through the peers’ entrance, saw her appear in the chamber for less than a minute and then leave the building. The whole visit took just three minutes.
In the latest published list (the year to March 2008) she claimed £29,600 from the Lords for overnight subsistence – one of the highest sums for any peer. She gave the location of her main residence as Kent.
This was curious because there appear to be no public documents linking the baroness to the county. The only reference is a speech to the Lords in 2006 which she began with the words “I am a resident of Maidstone borough council”. She is listed on the electoral roll at the Wapping address from 1996 to the present.
She has been a director of seven companies in the past 10 years and each time has said she lives at her Wapping home. The Companies Act says directors must give their “usual” address.
Uddin has a brother, Rousseau Khan, who lives in Bromley, south London. Khan owns the house and a neighbour said Uddin did not live there.
When a reporter rang her London home, her husband Komar picked up the telephone. He appeared confused about his wife’s “main residence” in Kent.
Reporter: “Have you lived there [the Tower Hamlets family home] for a long time?”
Husband: “Yeah, We came here in ’93.”
Reporter: “Ninety-three, I see. Am I also right in thinking you have a place down in Kent?”
Husband: “Sorry?” Reporter: “Do you have a place in Kent?”
Husband: “Kent?” Reporter: “Kent, as in the county Kent? No?”
Husband: “No.”
Minutes later the reporter spoke to Uddin about her three-minute visit to the House of Lords that day. She said she had been working on Lords business outside the building and had gone to the chamber but left quickly after realising she had another meeting.
The reporter attempted to broach the subject of her overnight expenses claim but she put the phone down. That evening she instructed Carter-Ruck, the libel lawyers, to speak on her behalf.
At the same time a reporter went to her London home. It is a three-storey building in a block of about a dozen flats built by Spitalfields Housing Association. The association’s housing stock is for people requiring affordable housing and the average rent for one of the association’s three-bedroom houses is £500 a month. The baroness is claiming more than £2,000 a month for running and maintaining a house in London.
Neighbours confirmed that the baroness shares the home with Komar, two of her sons and a daughter. Komar was outside the house smoking a cigarette.
When asked where his home was, he said, “I live here”, apparently surprised by the obvious question. When reminded about the home in Kent, he added: “I live in both places.” Later Carter-Ruck said that he had initially answered “no” when asked on the telephone whether he had a property in Kent because it belonged to his wife.
Fozlu Miah, 28, lives next to the Uddins in the same building, having moved in with his parents in the early 1990s, about the same time as the baroness. “As far as I know she lives here,” said Miah. “I see her most days through the window, coming in and going out. I sometimes talk to her . . . I call her auntie.”
Rafique Uddin (no relation), another neighbour, has known the family for years: “We all moved in at the same time. I don’t know anything about a house in Kent. I’m surprised to hear that because almost every day when I’m parking my car I can see their car. The mum [baroness] is going in and out. They are continuously living here as far as I know.”
Her daughter Masuma Siddiqah, 17, is best friends with the baroness’s daughter. She said: “[The baroness] is always there. I hear her beep her car every day when she gets home.” Siddiqah added that Uddin’s daughter had never told her anything about the family having a home in Kent.
In a statement last Saturday, Carter-Ruck confirmed the baroness owned a property in Maidstone which is registered as her main address with the House of Lords. The solicitors also offered to disclose the Kent address if The Sunday Times undertook not to publish details or approach members of the baroness’s family at the address. We declined.
Where was it? Overlooking a nature reserve on the fringes of Maidstone’s central shopping area lies a block of apartments built in 2005. Land registry searches confirmed that Uddin owns a street-level flat there.
She bought it for £155,000 in September 2005, nine months after peers’ expenses claims for overnight subsistence were made public for the first time. There is a mortgage on it.
It has two small bedrooms on the roadside and a lounge incorporating a kitchen area at the back. It is part of a group of six apartments that all share the same main entrance.
The Sunday Times has interviewed residents from all five of the other flats and others living nearby. They all said they had never seen Uddin, who cuts a distinctive figure, at the property. The neighbours said the property had been left empty since it had been bought. Three remembered peering into the two bedroom windows at the front and noting the rooms were unfurnished.
The windows now have thick curtains drawn across them after last weekend’s visit. The postman said some of the people who entered the flat on Sunday had arrived in a BMW four-wheel-drive. His description of the vehicle, including two letters from its registration plate, match Uddin’s car.
He said: “Nobody has ever lived in there. If you’d have come down a week ago you could have peered in and said nobody lives there.”
Adams has lived across the corridor from the baroness’s flat for three years. “I can’t emphasise enough how no one has lived there. I know that for a fact,” she said.
“There was a time when they had a sheet or something at the window which had fallen down and the security light was coming on, just shining into a completely empty flat . . . No, there has never been a stick of furniture in there.”
Matthew Hollis, whose flat is directly above the baroness’s property, confirmed there had been no furniture in the bedrooms. When initially asked about the flat, he responded: “I don’t think anyone does live there. I’ve never seen anyone in there . . .”
Stuart Brown and his girlfriend Gemma Fox lived directly below Uddin’s flat for three years before leaving recently. He said: “We never had anyone living above.”
The other ground-floor neighbour, who requested her name be withheld, said: “I thought it was empty, too. I posted a note through there about two months ago because my friend was interested in renting.”
A woman in a house that looks directly onto the back of the flat said she often saw people on the balconies above and below the baroness’s flat. “That sweater has been hanging over that middle flat balcony probably since the end of last summer,” she said.
“Every few months some people would just visit, but you are talking 10 minutes max,” Adams said.
On Friday evening the baroness issued a solicitors’ statement saying: “I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules. Should the relevant House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, co-operate fully.
“The Wapping house is rented, while I own the property in Maidstone. The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it.”
Yesterday evening a reporter spoke to Mark Ryan, a plumber who had entered the flat last weekend to fix the boiler. He described how the property was covered in dust and sparsely furnished.
“I’ve been in more flats than I care to remember, but this place looked like someone had left it ages ago,” he said. “It was very dusty. There were odds and sods of furniture around. There was an old mattress on the floor of one bedroom. It wasn’t made up. There was a fold-up clothes dryer in the other bedroom.
“It didn’t look lived-in. It certainly didn’t look like a family home.They told me they were just moving in.”
Insight: Jonathan Calvert, Claire Newell, Kevin Dowling, Solvej Krause
BARONESS UDDIN
— Born Bangladesh 1959
— Arrives in east London 1973
— Begins working for Newham social services 1988
— Deputy leader of Tower Hamlets 1994-6
— Fails to become Labour parliamentary candidate for Bethnal Green 1997
— Made Labour life peer 1998
— Starts Jagonari Centre to train and educate Asian women 1999
— Meets Blair as part of delegation to tackle Islamic extremism 2005
— Made chairwoman of ethnic minority women’s taskforce 2008
Main address
Maidstone
Two bedroom flat
Bought three years ago
Neighbours have never seen her there and say flat was "empty" and "unfurnished"
Not registered to vote
Second address
Wapping
Three bedroom house
Lived there for 15 years
Children went to school in the area
Neighbours see her regularly
Registered to vote at address
HAVE YOUR SAY
As a foreigner, I would say, Tony Blair was a professional politician.
He already knew this woman’s maturity, mentality, attitude, philosophy and morality when he appointed her 11 years ago. He appointed her because he cares for people and the nation more than his party.
Gunmo Gu, Newcastle, Uk
The full extent of Blair's debasement of the Constitution is now becoming apparent. This apparently corrupt and thieving woman was ennobled only because she failed to win a seat in the Commons. Hereditary Peers may have been 'privileged,' but they were never dishonest or fraudulent. Bring them back!
Bill, Suzhou, China
This is blatantFRAUD.Utility bills will show the full story,plus the many statements by neighbours,so it will be easy to get at the truth, however much she lies.Also-what about the 3 bed flat for deprived people in Tower hamlets for £500 per month?
ROBBERY.Serving the community? I think NOT!
Liz Roberts, Northwich, Cheshire
Disgusting! She should be made to pay back what she illegally claimed (with interest) and pay a fine to help the British economy, the taxpayer who she has robbed!
Harpreet, Leeds,
Ccha! Don't you people know that a peer simply HAS to have a place in the country? How DARE we question that?
I've lived in Tower Hamlets for years and never heard of this lady before; no evidence of emancipation of Asian ladies or seen reduction of fundamentalism. We've been milked AGAIN.
Helen, London, England
Utter disgrace - she should be made to return all the funds claimed - this belongs to the taxpayer not her !!
Philip Low, London, UK
I cannot wait for July, IF the list of all financial 'expenses' and abuses is published. All those guilty of abuse should be made to repay and chucked out of the government. Labour can NEVER survive this. Those with titles should have them taken away. What a mockery.
alice hudson, quimper, france
We need to have a major investigation into Parliament from an independent authority. It would then be possible to draw up a list of the names of every member of the House of Lords and Commons who has abused the system. Those people should then be removed for fraud and we could hold bye-elections.
Alexander Clark, Wokingham, United Kingdom
Investigate, prosecute and send her to jail. While the hardworking taxpayer struggle to keep up mortgage repayments and families are having their homes repossesed to due extreme taxing and general incompetance by the government, we are paying for this thief to line her pockets. What a farce.
Paul, London,
Just how many more Peers and MPs are there with their snouts in the trough? This is not sleaze, this is pure dishonesty and those practising it should be criminally prosecuted for it, like anybody else. How dare they show such arrogance and contempt for the taxpaying public they serve!
Dave, Holmer Green,
Yet another case of public service (questionable in this instance) for personal gain!
Great investigative journalism - please keep it up until the expenses and allowances of our political 'masters' are properly documented, supported, audited and totally transparent.
Bill Basham, Marmaris, Turkey
Disgusting,criminal behaviour .This woman should be in prison for theft.
What will happen? NOTHING.
She is in a minority group (well maybe ) and is well connected
So nothing will happen.
Gormless knows it goes on and B LIAR actively encouraged it! Nothing will change and nothing will happen!
charles holmes, chester, U.K.
It's the same trough and the majority look like they are browsing..
Andy Bond, London, uk
Dave H, Alexandria, USA - Apart from violence, we can do nothing. Believe me, most of us hate the government, ministers, MPs and the Lords. These 'lords & ladies' are not voted in they are friends of the PM - we are powerless. And membership of the EU has made us even weaker. The UK is finished.
Anthony Farrar, Worthing, UK
Seems lords and ladies are above the law.
twas ever thus.
ronnie, Bridego Bridge, UK
A number of the MPs claims exposed so far have been morally dubious, but "within the rules". However, this one sounds like outright fraud.
Stephen Lee, St Albans, Hertfordshire
These people sicken me. If it is not actiual corruption then it is so close as to make no difference morally. Strip "Lady" Uddin of her title (awarded for what?) & let her go back to whatever form of 'work' sustained her and her like before she decided sponging off taxpayers was the thing to do.
Phil, London,
'Lady' Udin should be stripped of her title and jailed for theft, how can these disgusting political worms claim to represent the people? They're theives, plain and simple, stealing from taxpayers, they must be made an example of. This level of rampant corruption cannot be tolerated.
Howard, London, united kingdom
THey should throw this woman out of the Lords IMMEDIATELY - take her to court, send her to prison as is comensurate with her crime, fine her and remind her with a smile that she will have a criminal record to her name for the rest of her life.
Welcome to the real world Labour cronies.
Drew, Nottingham,
Can someone explain how Stephen Hawking has still not been knighted or been made a lord yet this woman with her impressive 2 years as deputy leader Tower Hamlets manages it within one year of FAILING to become a labour candidate. It's not like it's a particularly high bar to jump.
Dave M, Bristol, UK
I assume sometime next week Baroness Uddin will be visited by the police and asked to explain the possible case of fraud and theft. Just in this story there is enough for the police to start an investigation. I suppose now it just needs someone to make a formal complaint.
Stephen, St. Ives, England
What a fantastic article! Beautifully written! As the excuses got worse, the evidence got better!! What a savage piece of journalism. We need more of this. Take these fraudsters away.
Mike, Ipswich, UK
This looks like a simple case of fraud: it should be reported to the police and investigated thoroughly.
Jocelyn Wood, Arequipa,
Another absolute disgrace!
Andy, Glos,
Is this newsworthy ?
I'm not shocked and not surprised... It's exactly what you would expect ! Poor woman is so inept she is well and truly caught.
It's so unusual for an associate of Blair !!!
Next episode will see her exhonerated !
There is so much of this... and it will continue to increase.
Stuart, Tiverton, UK
On the make and on the take. Politicans then wonder why the public think that most of the occupants of the Palace of Westminster are in it for themselves. The fact that MP's/Lords have the audacity to say we haven't broken the rules merely the spirit of them shows how corrupted the lot of them are.
Rupert, London, UK
How on earth does someone become a lord (lady) for being a social services officer and deputy leader of tower hamlets council? We go from admiral LORD Nelson to former prime ministers, to this woman, this fraudster, who is only there because of tony blairs desire to fill the lords with his croonies!
will, grimsby, uk
Please, please, please - find one honest MP or peer and report on them just for a change. I really am beginning to think there isn't one.....
charles, Congleton,
How many more? I did not know peers could claim ALA as well as MPs. These people takes us for fools. Great piece of investigative journalism. Thanks
Ian, Newtownabbey, N. Ireland
Why don't you Brits get angry at the thievery of your politicians?? I don't get it......you should be hanging your political leadership from the lampposts that light up the Thames river. Why do you suffer in silence?? Are you all sheep?
Dave H, Alexandria, USA
A very interesting & detailed piece of investigative journalism there, well done, keep it up.
Tim, Hillsborough, Great Britain
She should lose her title,job and be made to pay back every penny if these facts are true. yet another politician abusing the system
paul, clayton, staffs
Raping the taxpayer. Can we send her and her brood back from whence they came. And let her cheat her own countrymen rather than leeching from the UK Taxpayer. And by the by, what exactly has this person done / achieved to be honoured with a peerage. Oh, forgot she was a community worker..
Oliver Corning, Tunbridge , UK (Used to be Great Britain)
Greed and more greed. Throw them all in Jail I say.
This system needs to stop. If she is found to have not lived in this place and just used it to claim expenses she should be stripped of her position and slung in Jail. Disgusting.
Anthony Stewart, Chicago, USA
This is very naughty by the looks of things - I do hope she will be required to repay the 100,000 pounds she has received as a result of not knowing where she lives.
Joe, Kiev, Ukraine
I despair.
Remind me again why I pay huge amounts of tax?
And remind me further - are these allowances, which our "peers" and MPs receive, taxable (snort)?
Diana, London, UK
I wonder what the response to the Sunday Times investigation will be?
Will you be accused of racism, sexism, or both?
Fred Kite, Notts,
A greedy cheat abusing a position of authority...how surprising!
Kevin, San Francisco,
Show fewer comments
HAVE YOUR SAY
"
EAST LONDON PRESS updater report on the "Baroness of Bethnal Green" 'making the news':
The following item carried on the London Times web site together with 38 comments on the story, is published here for the records
"
From The Sunday Times
May 3, 2009
The deserted Kent flat that earned baroness £100,000
A ‘main home’ outside London meant Lady Uddin could claim £29,000 a year, but the neighbours tell Insight that nobody lived there
Insight
THE small two-bedroom apartment in a quiet corner of Maidstone had been a mystery to its neighbours for years.
As far as they could see, it had been vacant and unfurnished since the day it was bought. Nobody had ever attempted to let it. However, after darkness fell last Sunday night a BMW 4x4 entered the gated apartment block and parked outside the flat.
A neighbour saw four people, including two women in saris, apparently carrying something into the house. “They were there for about half an hour,” said a postman who lives next door but one to the flat. “They did take in something: it was either a television or a computer screen.” By the next morning thick curtains protected the two bedrooms that had been visible from the street, a light was on in the hallway and a striped mat had been placed outside the flat’s front door.
“I thought, ‘There’s a mat. Someone must have moved in’,” said Yvonne Adams, whose own front door is a few feet across the corridor. “No one’s been living there.”
RELATED LINKS
Tory buys flat round corner on expenses
Home Secretary faces inquiry over expenses
Geoff Hoon caught up in row over second home
What the neighbours did not know was that the property is owned by Baroness Uddin, 49, a Labour peer. She has designated the flat as her “main address” so she can claim almost £30,000 in accommodation expenses a year from the House of Lords while continuing to live in her London home.
The flurry of activity in the flat on Sunday night came after The Sunday Times had asked the baroness questions about her “main address” the previous day. Neighbours also report a brief visit by the same car the previous night.
Yesterday MPs and a peer called for a full investigation into the baroness’s expenses claims. She has received more than £100,000 (this figure includes an estimate for last year) since buying the Maidstone flat. She also claimed a further £83,000 for the same allowance from 2001, four years before she bought the flat.
Despite repeated questions, she has declined to discuss whether she actually owned or rented a main home outside London during this period.
Angus Robertson, the SNP’s leader in the Commons, said: “I will be writing to the House of Lords authorities and the police and asking them to investigate this report.”
Lord Oakeshott, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, said: “The system stinks. Peers should get a simple taxable daily rate instead of these allowances. An empty property can’t be a peer’s main residence. The Lords authorities must investigate.”
Born in Bangladesh, Manzila Pola Uddin came to Britain as a teenager and went on to become a community worker and social services officer while pursuing a political career that saw her rise to be deputy leader of Tower Hamlets borough council in the early 1990s.
She was made a peer by Tony Blair in 1998 and took the title “Baroness Uddin of Bethnal Green in our London Borough of Tower Hamlets”. Aged 38, she was the youngest woman in the Lords.
As a campaigner on women’s and ethnic minority issues she has become part of the new Labour establishment, befriending Cherie Blair. Her Facebook friends include the cabinet ministers Harriet Harman, Hazel Blears and David Miliband and Alastair Campbell, the former spin doctor.
However, she has never forgotten her roots. Her Facebook entry lists London as her home town and she has continued to work and live there. She and her family have resided in the same three-bedroom house in Wapping since the early 1990s.
A page entitled “my back-yard” on her personal website says: “I have a great sense of belonging to the East End which has been my home for over 30 years . . . it is where my professional and political career has taken shape, where my children have grown up, and also where I served as a local councillor for eight years.”
Yet she designated the family house in Tower Hamlets – where her children lived and went to school – as a “second home” and this allowed her to claim the cost of overnight accommodation in London.
The purpose of the allowance is explained in a House of Lords guidance note that says: “A member whose main residence is outside greater London and who maintains a residence in London for the purpose of attending sittings of the House may claim this allowance towards the cost of maintaining such a residence.”
In the Commons a “main residence” is considered to be the home where an MP spends most nights, but in the Lords there is no fixed definition. Mary Morgan, director of public information at the Lords, says: “A member will know what his main residence is. It’s where they live . . . For the purpose of claiming expenses, it’s where they travel to and from. There is no official definition.”
The Sunday Times began looking into Uddin’s expenses claims as part of an inquiry into peers who clock in to the House of Lords chamber briefly so as to claim overnight allowances. We photographed her going into the Lords through the peers’ entrance, saw her appear in the chamber for less than a minute and then leave the building. The whole visit took just three minutes.
In the latest published list (the year to March 2008) she claimed £29,600 from the Lords for overnight subsistence – one of the highest sums for any peer. She gave the location of her main residence as Kent.
This was curious because there appear to be no public documents linking the baroness to the county. The only reference is a speech to the Lords in 2006 which she began with the words “I am a resident of Maidstone borough council”. She is listed on the electoral roll at the Wapping address from 1996 to the present.
She has been a director of seven companies in the past 10 years and each time has said she lives at her Wapping home. The Companies Act says directors must give their “usual” address.
Uddin has a brother, Rousseau Khan, who lives in Bromley, south London. Khan owns the house and a neighbour said Uddin did not live there.
When a reporter rang her London home, her husband Komar picked up the telephone. He appeared confused about his wife’s “main residence” in Kent.
Reporter: “Have you lived there [the Tower Hamlets family home] for a long time?”
Husband: “Yeah, We came here in ’93.”
Reporter: “Ninety-three, I see. Am I also right in thinking you have a place down in Kent?”
Husband: “Sorry?” Reporter: “Do you have a place in Kent?”
Husband: “Kent?” Reporter: “Kent, as in the county Kent? No?”
Husband: “No.”
Minutes later the reporter spoke to Uddin about her three-minute visit to the House of Lords that day. She said she had been working on Lords business outside the building and had gone to the chamber but left quickly after realising she had another meeting.
The reporter attempted to broach the subject of her overnight expenses claim but she put the phone down. That evening she instructed Carter-Ruck, the libel lawyers, to speak on her behalf.
At the same time a reporter went to her London home. It is a three-storey building in a block of about a dozen flats built by Spitalfields Housing Association. The association’s housing stock is for people requiring affordable housing and the average rent for one of the association’s three-bedroom houses is £500 a month. The baroness is claiming more than £2,000 a month for running and maintaining a house in London.
Neighbours confirmed that the baroness shares the home with Komar, two of her sons and a daughter. Komar was outside the house smoking a cigarette.
When asked where his home was, he said, “I live here”, apparently surprised by the obvious question. When reminded about the home in Kent, he added: “I live in both places.” Later Carter-Ruck said that he had initially answered “no” when asked on the telephone whether he had a property in Kent because it belonged to his wife.
Fozlu Miah, 28, lives next to the Uddins in the same building, having moved in with his parents in the early 1990s, about the same time as the baroness. “As far as I know she lives here,” said Miah. “I see her most days through the window, coming in and going out. I sometimes talk to her . . . I call her auntie.”
Rafique Uddin (no relation), another neighbour, has known the family for years: “We all moved in at the same time. I don’t know anything about a house in Kent. I’m surprised to hear that because almost every day when I’m parking my car I can see their car. The mum [baroness] is going in and out. They are continuously living here as far as I know.”
Her daughter Masuma Siddiqah, 17, is best friends with the baroness’s daughter. She said: “[The baroness] is always there. I hear her beep her car every day when she gets home.” Siddiqah added that Uddin’s daughter had never told her anything about the family having a home in Kent.
In a statement last Saturday, Carter-Ruck confirmed the baroness owned a property in Maidstone which is registered as her main address with the House of Lords. The solicitors also offered to disclose the Kent address if The Sunday Times undertook not to publish details or approach members of the baroness’s family at the address. We declined.
Where was it? Overlooking a nature reserve on the fringes of Maidstone’s central shopping area lies a block of apartments built in 2005. Land registry searches confirmed that Uddin owns a street-level flat there.
She bought it for £155,000 in September 2005, nine months after peers’ expenses claims for overnight subsistence were made public for the first time. There is a mortgage on it.
It has two small bedrooms on the roadside and a lounge incorporating a kitchen area at the back. It is part of a group of six apartments that all share the same main entrance.
The Sunday Times has interviewed residents from all five of the other flats and others living nearby. They all said they had never seen Uddin, who cuts a distinctive figure, at the property. The neighbours said the property had been left empty since it had been bought. Three remembered peering into the two bedroom windows at the front and noting the rooms were unfurnished.
The windows now have thick curtains drawn across them after last weekend’s visit. The postman said some of the people who entered the flat on Sunday had arrived in a BMW four-wheel-drive. His description of the vehicle, including two letters from its registration plate, match Uddin’s car.
He said: “Nobody has ever lived in there. If you’d have come down a week ago you could have peered in and said nobody lives there.”
Adams has lived across the corridor from the baroness’s flat for three years. “I can’t emphasise enough how no one has lived there. I know that for a fact,” she said.
“There was a time when they had a sheet or something at the window which had fallen down and the security light was coming on, just shining into a completely empty flat . . . No, there has never been a stick of furniture in there.”
Matthew Hollis, whose flat is directly above the baroness’s property, confirmed there had been no furniture in the bedrooms. When initially asked about the flat, he responded: “I don’t think anyone does live there. I’ve never seen anyone in there . . .”
Stuart Brown and his girlfriend Gemma Fox lived directly below Uddin’s flat for three years before leaving recently. He said: “We never had anyone living above.”
The other ground-floor neighbour, who requested her name be withheld, said: “I thought it was empty, too. I posted a note through there about two months ago because my friend was interested in renting.”
A woman in a house that looks directly onto the back of the flat said she often saw people on the balconies above and below the baroness’s flat. “That sweater has been hanging over that middle flat balcony probably since the end of last summer,” she said.
“Every few months some people would just visit, but you are talking 10 minutes max,” Adams said.
On Friday evening the baroness issued a solicitors’ statement saying: “I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules. Should the relevant House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, co-operate fully.
“The Wapping house is rented, while I own the property in Maidstone. The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it.”
Yesterday evening a reporter spoke to Mark Ryan, a plumber who had entered the flat last weekend to fix the boiler. He described how the property was covered in dust and sparsely furnished.
“I’ve been in more flats than I care to remember, but this place looked like someone had left it ages ago,” he said. “It was very dusty. There were odds and sods of furniture around. There was an old mattress on the floor of one bedroom. It wasn’t made up. There was a fold-up clothes dryer in the other bedroom.
“It didn’t look lived-in. It certainly didn’t look like a family home.They told me they were just moving in.”
Insight: Jonathan Calvert, Claire Newell, Kevin Dowling, Solvej Krause
BARONESS UDDIN
— Born Bangladesh 1959
— Arrives in east London 1973
— Begins working for Newham social services 1988
— Deputy leader of Tower Hamlets 1994-6
— Fails to become Labour parliamentary candidate for Bethnal Green 1997
— Made Labour life peer 1998
— Starts Jagonari Centre to train and educate Asian women 1999
— Meets Blair as part of delegation to tackle Islamic extremism 2005
— Made chairwoman of ethnic minority women’s taskforce 2008
Main address
Maidstone
Two bedroom flat
Bought three years ago
Neighbours have never seen her there and say flat was "empty" and "unfurnished"
Not registered to vote
Second address
Wapping
Three bedroom house
Lived there for 15 years
Children went to school in the area
Neighbours see her regularly
Registered to vote at address
HAVE YOUR SAY
As a foreigner, I would say, Tony Blair was a professional politician.
He already knew this woman’s maturity, mentality, attitude, philosophy and morality when he appointed her 11 years ago. He appointed her because he cares for people and the nation more than his party.
Gunmo Gu, Newcastle, Uk
The full extent of Blair's debasement of the Constitution is now becoming apparent. This apparently corrupt and thieving woman was ennobled only because she failed to win a seat in the Commons. Hereditary Peers may have been 'privileged,' but they were never dishonest or fraudulent. Bring them back!
Bill, Suzhou, China
This is blatantFRAUD.Utility bills will show the full story,plus the many statements by neighbours,so it will be easy to get at the truth, however much she lies.Also-what about the 3 bed flat for deprived people in Tower hamlets for £500 per month?
ROBBERY.Serving the community? I think NOT!
Liz Roberts, Northwich, Cheshire
Disgusting! She should be made to pay back what she illegally claimed (with interest) and pay a fine to help the British economy, the taxpayer who she has robbed!
Harpreet, Leeds,
Ccha! Don't you people know that a peer simply HAS to have a place in the country? How DARE we question that?
I've lived in Tower Hamlets for years and never heard of this lady before; no evidence of emancipation of Asian ladies or seen reduction of fundamentalism. We've been milked AGAIN.
Helen, London, England
Utter disgrace - she should be made to return all the funds claimed - this belongs to the taxpayer not her !!
Philip Low, London, UK
I cannot wait for July, IF the list of all financial 'expenses' and abuses is published. All those guilty of abuse should be made to repay and chucked out of the government. Labour can NEVER survive this. Those with titles should have them taken away. What a mockery.
alice hudson, quimper, france
We need to have a major investigation into Parliament from an independent authority. It would then be possible to draw up a list of the names of every member of the House of Lords and Commons who has abused the system. Those people should then be removed for fraud and we could hold bye-elections.
Alexander Clark, Wokingham, United Kingdom
Investigate, prosecute and send her to jail. While the hardworking taxpayer struggle to keep up mortgage repayments and families are having their homes repossesed to due extreme taxing and general incompetance by the government, we are paying for this thief to line her pockets. What a farce.
Paul, London,
Just how many more Peers and MPs are there with their snouts in the trough? This is not sleaze, this is pure dishonesty and those practising it should be criminally prosecuted for it, like anybody else. How dare they show such arrogance and contempt for the taxpaying public they serve!
Dave, Holmer Green,
Yet another case of public service (questionable in this instance) for personal gain!
Great investigative journalism - please keep it up until the expenses and allowances of our political 'masters' are properly documented, supported, audited and totally transparent.
Bill Basham, Marmaris, Turkey
Disgusting,criminal behaviour .This woman should be in prison for theft.
What will happen? NOTHING.
She is in a minority group (well maybe ) and is well connected
So nothing will happen.
Gormless knows it goes on and B LIAR actively encouraged it! Nothing will change and nothing will happen!
charles holmes, chester, U.K.
It's the same trough and the majority look like they are browsing..
Andy Bond, London, uk
Dave H, Alexandria, USA - Apart from violence, we can do nothing. Believe me, most of us hate the government, ministers, MPs and the Lords. These 'lords & ladies' are not voted in they are friends of the PM - we are powerless. And membership of the EU has made us even weaker. The UK is finished.
Anthony Farrar, Worthing, UK
Seems lords and ladies are above the law.
twas ever thus.
ronnie, Bridego Bridge, UK
A number of the MPs claims exposed so far have been morally dubious, but "within the rules". However, this one sounds like outright fraud.
Stephen Lee, St Albans, Hertfordshire
These people sicken me. If it is not actiual corruption then it is so close as to make no difference morally. Strip "Lady" Uddin of her title (awarded for what?) & let her go back to whatever form of 'work' sustained her and her like before she decided sponging off taxpayers was the thing to do.
Phil, London,
'Lady' Udin should be stripped of her title and jailed for theft, how can these disgusting political worms claim to represent the people? They're theives, plain and simple, stealing from taxpayers, they must be made an example of. This level of rampant corruption cannot be tolerated.
Howard, London, united kingdom
THey should throw this woman out of the Lords IMMEDIATELY - take her to court, send her to prison as is comensurate with her crime, fine her and remind her with a smile that she will have a criminal record to her name for the rest of her life.
Welcome to the real world Labour cronies.
Drew, Nottingham,
Can someone explain how Stephen Hawking has still not been knighted or been made a lord yet this woman with her impressive 2 years as deputy leader Tower Hamlets manages it within one year of FAILING to become a labour candidate. It's not like it's a particularly high bar to jump.
Dave M, Bristol, UK
I assume sometime next week Baroness Uddin will be visited by the police and asked to explain the possible case of fraud and theft. Just in this story there is enough for the police to start an investigation. I suppose now it just needs someone to make a formal complaint.
Stephen, St. Ives, England
What a fantastic article! Beautifully written! As the excuses got worse, the evidence got better!! What a savage piece of journalism. We need more of this. Take these fraudsters away.
Mike, Ipswich, UK
This looks like a simple case of fraud: it should be reported to the police and investigated thoroughly.
Jocelyn Wood, Arequipa,
Another absolute disgrace!
Andy, Glos,
Is this newsworthy ?
I'm not shocked and not surprised... It's exactly what you would expect ! Poor woman is so inept she is well and truly caught.
It's so unusual for an associate of Blair !!!
Next episode will see her exhonerated !
There is so much of this... and it will continue to increase.
Stuart, Tiverton, UK
On the make and on the take. Politicans then wonder why the public think that most of the occupants of the Palace of Westminster are in it for themselves. The fact that MP's/Lords have the audacity to say we haven't broken the rules merely the spirit of them shows how corrupted the lot of them are.
Rupert, London, UK
How on earth does someone become a lord (lady) for being a social services officer and deputy leader of tower hamlets council? We go from admiral LORD Nelson to former prime ministers, to this woman, this fraudster, who is only there because of tony blairs desire to fill the lords with his croonies!
will, grimsby, uk
Please, please, please - find one honest MP or peer and report on them just for a change. I really am beginning to think there isn't one.....
charles, Congleton,
How many more? I did not know peers could claim ALA as well as MPs. These people takes us for fools. Great piece of investigative journalism. Thanks
Ian, Newtownabbey, N. Ireland
Why don't you Brits get angry at the thievery of your politicians?? I don't get it......you should be hanging your political leadership from the lampposts that light up the Thames river. Why do you suffer in silence?? Are you all sheep?
Dave H, Alexandria, USA
A very interesting & detailed piece of investigative journalism there, well done, keep it up.
Tim, Hillsborough, Great Britain
She should lose her title,job and be made to pay back every penny if these facts are true. yet another politician abusing the system
paul, clayton, staffs
Raping the taxpayer. Can we send her and her brood back from whence they came. And let her cheat her own countrymen rather than leeching from the UK Taxpayer. And by the by, what exactly has this person done / achieved to be honoured with a peerage. Oh, forgot she was a community worker..
Oliver Corning, Tunbridge , UK (Used to be Great Britain)
Greed and more greed. Throw them all in Jail I say.
This system needs to stop. If she is found to have not lived in this place and just used it to claim expenses she should be stripped of her position and slung in Jail. Disgusting.
Anthony Stewart, Chicago, USA
This is very naughty by the looks of things - I do hope she will be required to repay the 100,000 pounds she has received as a result of not knowing where she lives.
Joe, Kiev, Ukraine
I despair.
Remind me again why I pay huge amounts of tax?
And remind me further - are these allowances, which our "peers" and MPs receive, taxable (snort)?
Diana, London, UK
I wonder what the response to the Sunday Times investigation will be?
Will you be accused of racism, sexism, or both?
Fred Kite, Notts,
A greedy cheat abusing a position of authority...how surprising!
Kevin, San Francisco,
Show fewer comments
HAVE YOUR SAY
"
"Baroness" of "Bethnal Green" reportedly facing police investigation over empty address she has been claiming £££££ for
The first update on the DAILY MAIL GROUP web site, as at 1704 Hrs UK Time Sunday 3 May 2009:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1176837/Labour-peer-claims-100-000-vacant-flat-said-home.html
Labour peer 'claims £100,000 on vacant flat she said was her home'
By DAN NEWLING
Last updated at 5:04 PM on 03rd May 2009
Comments (0)
Add to My Stories
Baroness Uddin has been claiming expenses on a 'unoccupied' flat in Kent
A Labour peer is facing a possible police investigation for fraud after she claimed £100,000 in expenses for a flat she appears not to have lived in.
Baroness Uddin, who is Britain's first female Muslim peer, received the money by claiming that the deserted flat in Maidstone, Kent was her 'main home'.
Doing so meant the mother-of-five was able to claim nearly £30,000 a year towards the cost of staying London whilst she attended the House of Lords.
However, residents in all the building's other flats say that in the four years since the flat was bought, they have never seen the sari-wearing Baroness there.
And a plumber who entered the flat just nine days ago described it as being 'uninhabitable' - covered in dust with just an old mattress on the floor to sleep on.
In contrast, neighbours at the Baroness' other property - a three-storey family house in Wapping, east London - said she is regularly seen coming and going.
The Wapping house is where the Baroness brought up her children; where she is registered to vote; where she is fondly known by neighbours as 'auntie'; where she is registered as a company director and in an area the peer calls 'her backyard'.
It is also just four miles from the Palace of Westminster.
However, the 49-year-old former deputy leader of London's Tower Hamlets council has told the Lords' expenses authorities that it is merely her 'second address'.
By doing so she was, during the financial year to March 2008, able to claim £29,600 in overnight accommodation allowance, the Sunday Times revealed.
Assuming the peer claimed the same amount every year since buying the Maidstone flat in 2005, she would have earned over £100,000.
The scandal is just the latest to involve a politician who appears to have manipulated Parliamentary expenses for financial gain.
A series of recent exposes have revealed how MPs have pocketed millions of pounds by falsely claiming to live in homes outside London.
Today opposition politicians called for the Baroness' claims to be investigated by both the police and Parliament.
Scottish Nationalist MP Angus Robertson, who has campaigned for stricter expenses controls, said: 'I will be writing to the police and the House of Lords authorities asking them to investigate.'
And Liberal Democrat frontbencher Lord Oakeshott said: 'An empty property can't be a peer's main residence. The Lords authorities must check the facts of this case and investigate.'
'Main home': The flat in Maistone, Kent, which neighbours say has lain empty
The Bangladesh-born baroness - who was ennobled by Tony Blair - has insisted that she has done no wrong and has instructed the libel law firm Carter Ruck to represent her.
Since the Baroness became aware of the Sunday Times' investigation, her erstwhile neighbours in Maidstone have reported an unusual flurry of activity.
They report how last weekend, two women in saris helped move furniture into the hitherto deserted flat. And this Friday evening the Baroness was seen arriving at the flat. She spent the night there then left again 11 hours later.
Land Registry records show that Manzila Pola Uddin bought the two-bedroom flat on the first floor of a newly-built block in central Maidstone for £155,000 in September 2005.
Though smart, it is less than 100 yards from a noisy flyover road, which one has to cross to get to the nearest shop: a large Sainsbury's supermarket.
If the recent flurry of activity at the property is designed to prove she lives there, yesterday witnesses queued up to provide evidence to the contrary.
Residents from all five of the other flats in the same, recently-built, block have all said that they have never seen the Baroness there.
One of them, Yvonne Adams, said: 'I can't emphasis enough how no one has lived there. They just haven't. I know that for a fact.'
'Second address': The east London house where Baroness Uddin is regularly seen
Mrs Adams told how she had looked through the flat's windows and said: 'There has never been a stick of furniture in there.'
Matthew Hollis, who lives in the flat above, said: 'I don't think anyone does live there. I've never seen anyone in there.'
Mark Ryan, a Folkstone-based plumber who worked on the flat's boiler nine days ago said: 'It looked like they were just moving in. They told me they were just moving in.'
He went on: 'It looked like someone had not paid the rent and done a runner. You could tell that no-one was living there and hadn't done for a very long time.
'It was uninhabitable. It was very dusty. There was an old mattress on the floor of one bedroom. It wasn't made up.'
Moshahidur Rahman, 55, who lives in the house next to the Baroness' block of flats told how he would have known had the peer lived nearby.
He said: 'I've seen her on TV many times. She is very well known in the Bangladeshi community. I would know if she lived there and I have never seen her here. I spend a lot of time around here. But I've not heard of Baroness Uddin being seen.'
However, in startling contrast, neighbours at the Baroness' other home in Wapping, east London, yesterday appeared much more familiar with the peer.
Next-door neighbour Fozlu Miah, 28, said: 'I see her most days through the window, coming in and going out. I sometimes talk to her... I call her auntie.'
And another neighbour Rafique Uddin (no relation), whose daughter is friends with the Baroness' daughter, said: 'We all moved in at the same time. I don't know anything about a house in Kent.' She added: 'The mum [the Baroness] is going in and out. They are continuously living here as far as I know.'
Another women, who lives opposite the peer in London, said: 'I know the Baroness. She has lived here for years. Her family are always coming and going. She is busy with work so I don't see her everyday, but I do see her here at least twice a week.'
She added: 'She has never mentioned any house in Kent to me. I would say this here in Wapping is her main home. I am surprised she would say she wasn't.'
Other evidence linking the Baroness with the Wapping home is the fact that every time she has registered as a director of a company, she has given her London address. The Companies Act says directors must give their 'usual address'.
Also the Baroness' Facebook page says she lives in London, and her personal website describes her 'backyard' as being the east end of London which she writes 'has been my home for over 30 years'.
When approached during her brief stay in Maidstone this weekend, the Baroness refused the opportunity to allow a journalist into the flat to check it was being lived in.
Instead she said over the intercom: 'I'm telling you, this is a fully-furnished home. You will just have to accept that. I'm telling you the truth.'
A statement released by her solicitors read: 'I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules. Should the relevant House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, cooperate fully.'
The statement added: 'The Wapping house is rented while I own the property in Maidstone.
'The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it.'
The Lords' accommodation allowance is available to any peer 'whose main residence is outside greater London and who maintains a residence in London for the purpose of attending sittings of the House'.
Although there is no official definition of a 'main residence' in the rules, Mary Morgan, director of public information at the Lords said: 'A member will know what his main residence is.
'It's where they live.....for the purposes of claiming expenses it's where they travel to and from.'
Print this article Read later Email to a friend
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1176837/Labour-peer-claims-100-000-vacant-flat-said-home.html
Labour peer 'claims £100,000 on vacant flat she said was her home'
By DAN NEWLING
Last updated at 5:04 PM on 03rd May 2009
Comments (0)
Add to My Stories
Baroness Uddin has been claiming expenses on a 'unoccupied' flat in Kent
A Labour peer is facing a possible police investigation for fraud after she claimed £100,000 in expenses for a flat she appears not to have lived in.
Baroness Uddin, who is Britain's first female Muslim peer, received the money by claiming that the deserted flat in Maidstone, Kent was her 'main home'.
Doing so meant the mother-of-five was able to claim nearly £30,000 a year towards the cost of staying London whilst she attended the House of Lords.
However, residents in all the building's other flats say that in the four years since the flat was bought, they have never seen the sari-wearing Baroness there.
And a plumber who entered the flat just nine days ago described it as being 'uninhabitable' - covered in dust with just an old mattress on the floor to sleep on.
In contrast, neighbours at the Baroness' other property - a three-storey family house in Wapping, east London - said she is regularly seen coming and going.
The Wapping house is where the Baroness brought up her children; where she is registered to vote; where she is fondly known by neighbours as 'auntie'; where she is registered as a company director and in an area the peer calls 'her backyard'.
It is also just four miles from the Palace of Westminster.
However, the 49-year-old former deputy leader of London's Tower Hamlets council has told the Lords' expenses authorities that it is merely her 'second address'.
By doing so she was, during the financial year to March 2008, able to claim £29,600 in overnight accommodation allowance, the Sunday Times revealed.
Assuming the peer claimed the same amount every year since buying the Maidstone flat in 2005, she would have earned over £100,000.
The scandal is just the latest to involve a politician who appears to have manipulated Parliamentary expenses for financial gain.
A series of recent exposes have revealed how MPs have pocketed millions of pounds by falsely claiming to live in homes outside London.
Today opposition politicians called for the Baroness' claims to be investigated by both the police and Parliament.
Scottish Nationalist MP Angus Robertson, who has campaigned for stricter expenses controls, said: 'I will be writing to the police and the House of Lords authorities asking them to investigate.'
And Liberal Democrat frontbencher Lord Oakeshott said: 'An empty property can't be a peer's main residence. The Lords authorities must check the facts of this case and investigate.'
'Main home': The flat in Maistone, Kent, which neighbours say has lain empty
The Bangladesh-born baroness - who was ennobled by Tony Blair - has insisted that she has done no wrong and has instructed the libel law firm Carter Ruck to represent her.
Since the Baroness became aware of the Sunday Times' investigation, her erstwhile neighbours in Maidstone have reported an unusual flurry of activity.
They report how last weekend, two women in saris helped move furniture into the hitherto deserted flat. And this Friday evening the Baroness was seen arriving at the flat. She spent the night there then left again 11 hours later.
Land Registry records show that Manzila Pola Uddin bought the two-bedroom flat on the first floor of a newly-built block in central Maidstone for £155,000 in September 2005.
Though smart, it is less than 100 yards from a noisy flyover road, which one has to cross to get to the nearest shop: a large Sainsbury's supermarket.
If the recent flurry of activity at the property is designed to prove she lives there, yesterday witnesses queued up to provide evidence to the contrary.
Residents from all five of the other flats in the same, recently-built, block have all said that they have never seen the Baroness there.
One of them, Yvonne Adams, said: 'I can't emphasis enough how no one has lived there. They just haven't. I know that for a fact.'
'Second address': The east London house where Baroness Uddin is regularly seen
Mrs Adams told how she had looked through the flat's windows and said: 'There has never been a stick of furniture in there.'
Matthew Hollis, who lives in the flat above, said: 'I don't think anyone does live there. I've never seen anyone in there.'
Mark Ryan, a Folkstone-based plumber who worked on the flat's boiler nine days ago said: 'It looked like they were just moving in. They told me they were just moving in.'
He went on: 'It looked like someone had not paid the rent and done a runner. You could tell that no-one was living there and hadn't done for a very long time.
'It was uninhabitable. It was very dusty. There was an old mattress on the floor of one bedroom. It wasn't made up.'
Moshahidur Rahman, 55, who lives in the house next to the Baroness' block of flats told how he would have known had the peer lived nearby.
He said: 'I've seen her on TV many times. She is very well known in the Bangladeshi community. I would know if she lived there and I have never seen her here. I spend a lot of time around here. But I've not heard of Baroness Uddin being seen.'
However, in startling contrast, neighbours at the Baroness' other home in Wapping, east London, yesterday appeared much more familiar with the peer.
Next-door neighbour Fozlu Miah, 28, said: 'I see her most days through the window, coming in and going out. I sometimes talk to her... I call her auntie.'
And another neighbour Rafique Uddin (no relation), whose daughter is friends with the Baroness' daughter, said: 'We all moved in at the same time. I don't know anything about a house in Kent.' She added: 'The mum [the Baroness] is going in and out. They are continuously living here as far as I know.'
Another women, who lives opposite the peer in London, said: 'I know the Baroness. She has lived here for years. Her family are always coming and going. She is busy with work so I don't see her everyday, but I do see her here at least twice a week.'
She added: 'She has never mentioned any house in Kent to me. I would say this here in Wapping is her main home. I am surprised she would say she wasn't.'
Other evidence linking the Baroness with the Wapping home is the fact that every time she has registered as a director of a company, she has given her London address. The Companies Act says directors must give their 'usual address'.
Also the Baroness' Facebook page says she lives in London, and her personal website describes her 'backyard' as being the east end of London which she writes 'has been my home for over 30 years'.
When approached during her brief stay in Maidstone this weekend, the Baroness refused the opportunity to allow a journalist into the flat to check it was being lived in.
Instead she said over the intercom: 'I'm telling you, this is a fully-furnished home. You will just have to accept that. I'm telling you the truth.'
A statement released by her solicitors read: 'I do not believe that I have done anything wrong or breached any House of Lords rules. Should the relevant House of Lords authorities wish to investigate the matter I will, of course, cooperate fully.'
The statement added: 'The Wapping house is rented while I own the property in Maidstone.
'The Maidstone property is furnished and I strongly deny that I have never lived there. Indeed I have stayed there regularly since buying it.'
The Lords' accommodation allowance is available to any peer 'whose main residence is outside greater London and who maintains a residence in London for the purpose of attending sittings of the House'.
Although there is no official definition of a 'main residence' in the rules, Mary Morgan, director of public information at the Lords said: 'A member will know what his main residence is.
'It's where they live.....for the purposes of claiming expenses it's where they travel to and from.'
Print this article Read later Email to a friend
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Poverty of the MPs is in the grotesque shamelessness... and petty greed
EAST LONDON PRESS says at 0510 Hrs on Tuesday 31 March 2009: It is not just Harry Cohen, the east London MP who used to flaunt a faker beard and spout strings of calculated socialistic confections... Having lost BOTH in order to stay on the bandwagon, Cohen seems to have also lost any sense of rationality. And dignity. How else could he be saying those things, comparing himself to Churchill in that way? There were indeed many flaws in Churchill’s life and character. But Harry Cohen is not remotely convincing as a comparable Member of Parliament...Or as a member of society... What Cohen’s banal boast tells us about him is that he belongs to a parliament of political, mental, moral pigmies with no evident shame...
