12. Letter to the Commissioner from
Rt Hon Andrew Mackay, 21 January 2010
As agreed I am responding to your inquiries concerning
the complaint made by a Mr Goggins. You asked seven specific questions
which I have answered below. However let me first make four brief
factual points which I hope will assist with your deliberations.
Firstly after I married Julie Kirkbride I sought
advice from the then Head of the Fees Office [...] about our ACA.
He asked about our homes and was told we jointly owned a family
house in Westminster and a large apartment in a listed building
in Julie's constituency. I explained that I never had a home in
my constituency. [The Head of the Fees Office] then advised that
as we had two proper homes with a joint mortgage and where we
were both on the electoral roll either could be deemed a main
home. He recommended that I nominate [the Bromsgrove property]
as my main home and claim ACA on [the London property].
Secondly this arrangement was put on file in the
Fees Office and ACA payments were made accordingly. At all times
we declared our second and main home addresses to the Fees Office
in a totally transparent way. This was never queried.
Thirdly [the Bromsgrove property] was a natural main
home for me as I had close links to the Bromsgrove area where
my family and friends still live. I was born and brought up in
the next door constituencies and look after the interests of two
close elderly relatives through our family's longstanding property
portfolio based in the area.
Fourthly on 20 May last the rules were changed with
immediate effect to state:
"Members who are married to each other must
nominate the same main home and are limited to claiming one person's
PAAE between them."
Whilst the single claim did not affect us, as I had
already elected to take up the London Costs Allowance due to a
rule change for the new financial year, the introduction of the
rule on nominating the same main home confirms this was not previously
in place.
My answers to your questions are as follows:
1. During this period I nominated [the Bromsgrove
property] as my main home and [the London property] as my second
home. We bought [the London property] for £850,000 in 1998
taking out a mortgage of £200,000 which we still maintain
on an interest only basis. We bought [the Bromsgrove property]
in 1997 for £75,000 in a very dilapidated state and spent
more than double the purchase price on restoring it. We took out
an interest only mortgage of £180,000 on it in 2004. We further
extended the interest-only mortgage by £50,000 in April 2008
to cover the cost of an extra bedroom to meet our family's needs.
3. The accommodation in [the Bromsgrove property]
originally comprised a sitting room, dining room, kitchen, two
double bedrooms and two bathrooms. We then added a further bedroom
to make it three. [The London property] is a three bedroom terraced
house with three reception rooms, two bathrooms and a study. My
earlier points above explain my designations.
4. Whilst my points above largely cover this
question I would just add that I rarely spend a night in my constituency
as on Fridays and weekends I prefer to commute between there and
my main home which are linked by motorways or dual carriageways
for virtually the whole journey. I also regularly visit my constituency
from London during the week. As a result, I spend most Friday,
Saturday and Sunday nights (I attend to previously mentioned family
business on Monday morning) as well as most recesses at my main
home.
As you point out, the figures for where I spend my
nights are likely to be estimates, particularly as I do not have
an electronic diary or written records for the years in question.
However, I can give a best estimate for the last calendar year
which I believe would also broadly reflect my sleeping patterns
in the financial years in question. This estimate would indicate
that I spent 155 nights at [the Bromsgrove property], 139 nights
at [the London property], 54 nights on holiday, nine nights on
parliamentary business abroad and eight nights in the constituency.
5. I did not inform the Fees Office that I was
sharing a property with another Member who was my wife. I made
the reasonable assumption that this rule was to identify non-related
MPs who had come to private agreements to share properties and
did not apply to those Members where it was public knowledge that
they were married to each other.
6. The mortgage has always been interest only
and I attach a breakdown of my ACA claims which is a best estimate
as information provided by the Fees Office is somewhat confusing.[184]
7. I refer you to points two and three in my
initial comments above.
I conclude by hoping you will agree this is a vexatious
complaint, lodged late in the day after Sir Thomas Legg's inquiries
were near conclusion and there is no case to answer.
21 January 2010
184 Not included in the written evidence. The information
given by Mr Mackay about his mortgage interest claims is reproduced
at WE 13 below. Back
| 
