They are joint owners and it seems that he was handling the correspondence with the letting company. So, yes, he would have been the first person to ask. Nothing to do with deference but common sense.

She said that she was unaware that they needed a licence.

She should then have said it was an oversight.

When she was informed by the Daily Mail about licence, why didn't she ask her husband about it as he was handling the rental agreement? That would be the first thing to do before telling the PM surely?

The first thing, after the Mail told her about lack of licence, would have been to ask the co-owner - her husband - what he knew. Did he lie to her?

She initially said that they were unaware that they needed a licence. Now, after the agent explained their oversight, it became clear that they were told, and emails discussing price, payments and dates, confirms this.

Fine if she had said in her initial letter that it was an oversight, which I think it was. However to save face, she said that she was unaware that a licence was needed and that was untrue.

Never mentioned the Tories or anybody else. She clearly stated in her letter that she was unaware of the need for licence yet emails show it was discussed. What do you not understand?

Evidence and a trial is needed first.

She lied and said she was unaware that they needed a licence. Now emails have come to light that discuss applying, cost and payments. She should have said in the first letter to PM that it had been an oversight.

They are joint owners of the property. When the Daily Mail informed her about this, she surely would have discussed with her husband. She should have said then, that it was an oversight instead of saying they were unaware of the need for a licence.

She deliberately lied to the PM saying she was unaware she needed one. If she had said it was an oversight then that would be acceptable. There are emails discussing the licence, price and date of payment. She isn't smart enough to think ahead and what the agent may say yet she is Chancellor !!!!!

Letter to PM no 2 - Reeves has now 'found' an email from letting agent discussing said licence ( that she didn't know about) and another telling her the price to be paid in two parts.
Letter to PM no 1 - Reeves was unaware she needed a licence.
🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

In her letter to Starmer she said she was unaware that she needed a licence yet the letting agent said they told her that they would apply on her behalf.
Somebody is lying.
Also the agent has been illegally letting out the property without the full legal papers including the licence.

I'm her letter to Starmer she said that she wasn't aware that she needed a licence. The agent says they offered to apply for her. Somebody is lying.

1. The agent said they offered to apply on her behalf.
2. But in her letter to Starmer she said she was unaware that she needed a licence.

Somebody is lying and she isn't cleared yet.

3.The agent is also liable and should never have let the property without all legal papers including the licence.

Fake news!

He's an idiot but not so much that he would blab just to be found 'suicided'.

I prefer to look at the whole story and not just the sensational headlines. Why have you and the media left out other details of the lease which explains why it's a peppercorn rent?

He didn't say to opt for American system. He referred to systems in mainland Europe especially France.

They were given the right to lease it as working royals and it was a yearly contract. The house was renovated at public expense with the couple paying for interior decoration. After they left, the lease was not renewed and they paid back costs for renovation.

Do you know the details of his lease and why a peppercorn rent is paid - if asked for.

Since when - what?

It would be easy to find out if any funding for him comes from the public purse as it is recorded and published yearly. It's a private affair if his family help him out. Dodgy dealings are not necessarily illegal and often done using loopholes and clever accountants.

His rent is a symbolic payment of typically £1 a year to meet legal requirements of a lease. It is paid when demanded. His agreement is not a rental agreement whereby the landlord is responsible for maintenance of the property. Andrew paid £1m upfront, then £7.5m in upkeep and renovation.

I know how peppercorn rents and leases work and that he is no longer being paid from the public purse. I also know how to interpret 'media speak'.

Wait and see.

Not defending him. Just giving you facts.

Do you know about 'peppercorn ' rent and his lease? The justice dept of UK would have to see if there is a case to answer regarding rape. USA FBI has already dropped any investigation unless new evidence comes to light. A book claiming rape is not enough to justify this.

He's a private citizen now so that is his business. Like anyone else, if he is found to have broken laws, he will be investigated.