Pied a terre

[eek]

The last thread I started was about NOT using myCo equipment on an Umbrella contract which was the very antithesis of fraud (playing strictly by the rules) but was shouted down for being ridiculous. Seems that when querying any regulation any smidgen over-lenient interpretation is considered fraud, and any over smidgen under-lenient interpretation is considered daft. If it wasn't a grey area it wouldn't be grounds for discussion.

It's a rather strange definition of fraud if you actually WANTED to pay extra for a property you're not using if there was any option about the matter.

You wouldn't ask Vodafone, O2, EE etc. for a business phone monthly contract that only connects Monday-Friday because, technically it may be doable, but that's not standard business practice in the telecoms market. I'm only making the point that medium-term lets are monthly, not Monday-Friday, as that is what is standard business practice in the property rental market.

Yes, as has been pointed out, there are some people who will let to you Monday-Friday, but these are certainly not common and if you're starting a new contract in an unfamiliar city, trying to find your feet at the client, you have little enough time to find ANYWHERE to stay without trying to seek out Unicorn letting agents. Any competent business would focus their time on getting the work off to a good start, not faffing about trying to dictate weird rental terms which are of no concern to your client.

And none of that has anything to do with the original question - which wasn't can I rent a property near my client but was can I rent somewhere that is pretty but not near the end client (to which the answer is Nope).

[hugebrain]

And none of that has anything to do with the original question - which wasn't can I rent a property near my client but was can I rent somewhere that is pretty but not near the end client (to which the answer is Nope).

As usual, I’m more confused than before I asked. Last time I looked this up it was nice and clear that you could rent a place for a limited period (<two years I think) without bothering about not staying there at weekends (I could always do company work on something other than the contract at the weekend if that was really a problem). I won’t have a spare room for guests.

It’s not very practical to travel four hours (one way) to commute to the office, although I could probably do this for a few weeks. I don’t believe that there’s any rule that the Company has to rent a flat in the Barbican rather than Brighton if the job is in the City. Happy to be proved wrong of course, but nothing posted so far has seemed very relevant.

[northernladuk]

As usual, I’m more confused than before I asked. Last time I looked this up it was nice and clear that you could rent a place for a limited period (
It’s not very practical to travel four hours (one way) to commute to the office, although I could probably do this for a few weeks. I don’t believe that there’s any rule that the Company has to rent a flat in the Barbican rather than Brighton if the job is in the City. Happy to be proved wrong of course, but nothing posted so far has seemed very relevant.

You've confused everyone with this ridiculous sitution whatever it is.

Bottom line is.. You can rent someone where that is purely for the purpose of business. If it's 7 days a week then you cannot claim the portion that is useable for non business. That's about it. It's a pretty clear rule. If you throw a stupid idea in then yes it's going to break but if you apply it to any normal situation it works. Forget the beach rubbish. If you want to rent a place in London for two days then you claim two days of it and the rest is out of your own pocket.

Now re-explain to us exactly what you want to do. Please make it a reasonable suggestion and make it detailed. Not some pie in the sky idea and lets see if we can re-apply the rule and come to something you understand.

For example...

I don’t believe that there’s any rule that the Company has to rent a flat in the Barbican rather than Brighton if the job is in the City.

There isn't but how can you sit in front of a tax inspector and try and argue a flat in Brighton is wholly and exclusively for business when you client is in London. Common sense is probably the rule that stops you doing what you are proposing.

So give us a detailed, realistic situation you are trying to sort out.

[hugebrain]

So give us a detailed, realistic situation you are trying to sort out.

House ooop North. Contract two days in London per week.

Too far to commute weekly. London too expensive to rent there if avoidable.

So looking for something in the middle, a reasonable commute to do once or twice a week. Could stay overnight in a London hotel if necessary but would prefer not to.

Anyone got any convincing evidence for this not staying seven days theory? If it was practical to drive home each week I’d just do that.

[BlasterBates]

House ooop North. Contract two days in London per week.

Too far to commute weekly. London too expensive to rent there if avoidable.

So looking for something in the middle, a reasonable commute to do once or twice a week. Could stay overnight in a London hotel if necessary but would prefer not to.

Anyone got any convincing evidence for this not staying seven days theory? If it was practical to drive home each week I’d just do that.

The advantage of booking a hotel close to the office where you're working is that is unambiguous and won't be questioned. Once you start renting flats miles away from the office including days you aren't working there, it gets much harder to justify. The point is no-one can really prove whether you're there or not so HMRC will simply assume you are.

[Lance]

House ooop North. Contract two days in London per week.

Too far to commute weekly. London too expensive to rent there if avoidable.

So looking for something in the middle, a reasonable commute to do once or twice a week. Could stay overnight in a London hotel if necessary but would prefer not to.

Anyone got any convincing evidence for this not staying seven days theory? If it was practical to drive home each week I’d just do that.

2 days a week. So 1 or 2 nights a week in London.
A hotel will cost less than rent. And you can get the VAT back on a hotel.
It's not great, but it's near a tube line, is Holiday Inn Kensington High Street. £125 a night. Cheaper hotels are around but that one is well located.
A rental is a 6 month commitment. You're gonna feel a right bozo if you get binned, or there's another lockdown and you're saddled with that to pay.
And you're still going to have to commute if you're by a beach.

[hobnob]

My home is outside London [..] Now post-Covid if I want to work a couple of days in the office, it makes sense to have somewhere by the beach for working from home and a pied a terre in London for when I have to be in the office.

Going back to the original post, I don't understand where the beachside property fits in. If you're working from home, why wouldn't you use your actual home? You still have the same journey time, whether you're going back on Friday evening or Tuesday evening.

[hobnob]

House ooop North. Contract two days in London per week.

Too far to commute weekly. London too expensive to rent there if avoidable.

So looking for something in the middle, a reasonable commute to do once or twice a week. Could stay overnight in a London hotel if necessary but would prefer not to.

Ok, I think I now have a better idea of your situation:
* You live up North, and it would take you 4 hours to travel from there to the London office, so you need to stay overnight (relatively) close to the office.
* You don't want to do an 8 hour round trip every week, so you want to stay near the beach and live there 7 days a week. This would essentially be your home, and you would "work from home" at the beach property.
* You will travel from Brighton to London 2 days a week, and either stay overnight or travel back to Brighton each evening.

Before you dig any further into the tax implications, I'd recommend looking at the costs involved. I.e. what's the going rent for London and/or Brighton? If London is too expensive to rent a flat, and too expensive for a hotel, where does your "pied a terre" fit in? I.e. are you just talking about a single rental in Brighton, rather than 2 separate properties?

For tax, if you are living in the beach house every day for several months, I think you'd have the same problem as the actor who stayed in London all week round.

Personally, I think that 8 hours a week is reasonable: I did that in a previous contract, and lots of people who live in London will have a 1 hour commute each way (i.e. 10 hours per week). However, that's a personal decision. There's no right or wrong answer for your personal limits, but if you really don't like travelling then maybe you should be looking for contracts that are a bit closer to home?

Also, just to state the obvious, Brighton is further south than London. I'd guess that it would take you at least an hour to get from there to the London office, depending on how close you are to a station at each end. So, it might make more sense to go for somewhere that's an hour north of London. That way, you'd still have the same commute from the rented place to the office, but it would only be 3 hours each way from your home to the rented place. If that's a more manageable journey, you could then go back home after those 2 days in the office. That would save you money on rent, and avoid any tax questions.

[Lance]

Ok, I think I now have a better idea of your situation:
* You live up North, and it would take you 4 hours to travel from there to the London office, so you need to stay overnight (relatively) close to the office.
* You don't want to do an 8 hour round trip every week, so you want to stay near the beach and live there 7 days a week. This would essentially be your home, and you would "work from home" at the beach property.
* You will travel from Brighton to London 2 days a week, and either stay overnight or travel back to Brighton each evening.

Before you dig any further into the tax implications, I'd recommend looking at the costs involved. I.e. what's the going rent for London and/or Brighton? If London is too expensive to rent a flat, and too expensive for a hotel, where does your "pied a terre" fit in? I.e. are you just talking about a single rental in Brighton, rather than 2 separate properties?

For tax, if you are living in the beach house every day for several months, I think you'd have the same problem as the actor who stayed in London all week round.

Personally, I think that 8 hours a week is reasonable: I did that in a previous contract, and lots of people who live in London will have a 1 hour commute each way (i.e. 10 hours per week). However, that's a personal decision. There's no right or wrong answer for your personal limits, but if you really don't like travelling then maybe you should be looking for contracts that are a bit closer to home?

Also, just to state the obvious, Brighton is further south than London. I'd guess that it would take you at least an hour to get from there to the London office, depending on how close you are to a station at each end. So, it might make more sense to go for somewhere that's an hour north of London. That way, you'd still have the same commute from the rented place to the office, but it would only be 3 hours each way from your home to the rented place. If that's a more manageable journey, you could then go back home after those 2 days in the office. That would save you money on rent, and avoid any tax questions.

good point but then why not stay in a hotel/airbnb at this location as it will be far cheaper than London?

No matter how you look at it, a rental neither solves the problem, nor does it help with tax.

[northernladuk]

I think it's time to lock this thread. It's going absolutely nowhere.