The Chancellor’s Licensing Lapse and Its Implications
Rachel Reeves, the UK Chancellor, recently applied for a licence to let her property in Dulwich, southeast London. However, she still faces the potential of returning nearly £40,000 in rent to her tenants. This situation has sparked significant debate and scrutiny over her actions.
The Chancellor had failed to secure the necessary permission to let her home, which is her responsibility. Initially, she informed Sir Keir Starmer that she was unaware of the requirement to obtain the licence from Southwark council after the Daily Mail reported on the issue. However, after he dismissed the case against her, she provided emails between her husband and the lettings agency showing that the agency had offered to provide the licence. Despite this, they did not follow through and were understood not to have charged the Chancellor and her husband the almost £1,000 it cost to obtain one.
In a second statement, Sir Keir criticized the Chancellor for not reviewing the email chain before informing him that she was unaware of the licensing requirement. He wrote: “It would clearly have been better if you and your husband had conducted a full trawl through all email correspondence with the estate agency before writing to me yesterday.”
Despite this, he concluded that she had acted in ‘good faith’ and stated, “I still regard this as a case of an inadvertent failure to secure the appropriate licence, which you have apologised for and are now rectifying.”
Ms Reeves appeared to leave the task of handling the licence for their house to her husband. However, she has previously mentioned that she is responsible for managing the family finances at home, while her civil servant husband, Nicholas Joicey, handles the household chores.
“I’m in charge of paying the mortgage, the childcare, the gas, electricity and water,” she told the Mirror in 2021, before becoming Chancellor. “I know most of the bills and who we’re with, so I make sure that adds up every months, the shopping, food deliveries. I like to have a bit of control.”
Southwark council’s website advises tenants that they can apply to a tribunal to recoup rent under a separate process in circumstances where a landlord has not had an appropriate licence. It states that ‘rent repayment orders’ can be up to a year of payments, which in Ms Reeves’ case would be around £38,000.
Individuals are directed to Justice For Tenants for help applying for refunds—a charity known for its high success rate. If a tribunal makes an award for repayment, it can be enforced as if it were a debt in the county court.
Tonight, the Tory Party chairman, Kevin Hollinrake, called for a full investigation. “Rachel Reeves is in charge of this country’s public finances, but yet she couldn’t even handle her own personal paperwork,” he said. “It beggars belief that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was told that she needed a licence but never once realized that she had not paid for one. And this comes on top of the fact that she has already changed her story after originally claiming ignorance of the licensing requirements.”
“Keir Starmer might want to sweep this under the carpet because he does not have the backbone to act, but the Conservatives will continue to hold the Government to account for this latest scandal. There must be a full investigation.”
The scandal emerged after the Daily Mail revealed that Ms Reeves had broken the law by letting her family home without a licence after moving to Downing Street. She failed to obtain a letting licence for her four-bedroom detached family home in Dulwich, southeast London, which she let for £3,200 a month. Southwark council requires landlords to obtain ‘selective’ licences but has stated they won’t fine her over the breach.
While Ms Reeves initially claimed she was unaware of the requirements, she later backtracked and published emails showing her letting agency had volunteered to get the licence. However, they failed to do this. Nevertheless, it remains her responsibility to obtain the licence.
Today, Downing Street insisted that Ms Reeves’s housing scandal was different from Angela Rayner’s situation. Ms Rayner was forced to resign as deputy prime minister in September after it was revealed that she failed to pay £40,000 in stamp duty.
Asked if the Chancellor was ‘unsackable’ because she was due to deliver the Budget this month, the Prime Minister’s spokesman said the two situations were different. The spokesman said, “These are distinct and separate cases.” There was a ruling from the independent adviser on ministerial standards, and you have the ruling in this case. The Prime Minister agrees with that and sees no need for any further action.”
In September, Sir Laurie Magnus, the independent adviser on ministerial standards, found that Ms Rayner had paid the wrong rate of stamp duty ‘in good faith’ but had still broken the ministerial code. She later resigned.
Late on Thursday night, Sir Laurie advised the Prime Minister that Ms Reeves had committed an ‘unfortunate but inadvertent error’ but did not need to resign. He said it was ‘regrettable’ that information provided on successive days had generated ‘confusion’ but added, “I find no evidence of bad faith.”
No 10 continues to refuse to say whether Ms Reeves has breached the ministerial code.
The Times reported that Ms Reeves got permission from her mortgage lender to let her house once she moved into Downing Street.
