Â鶹ԼÅÄ

Dear Lembit Öpik,

The Daily Telegraph is investigating the expense claims made by MPs under the Parliamentary additional costs allowance system since the 2004/05 financial year.
We are considering publishing an article in tomorrow's newspaper (13th May 2009) which will contain details of your expense claims.
We are aware of the provisions of the statutory instrument passed by Parliament last July and will therefore not be publishing MPs' addresses or other details that could compromise security.
However, as a matter of legitimate public interest and concern, we intend to publish the following details about your expense claims under the Additional Costs Allowance. We invite you to respond to the following points:
* Correspondence sent to you from Lambeth Council suggests that you share - or shared - your flat in south east London with . Is this the case?
If so, please clarify whether pays/paid you rent to stay in the flat, or pays/paid a share of the interest charges on your mortgage. If so, how much?
* Since 2004 you have claimed the full council tax bill for the property. If you did share or the property, why did you do this?
* In May 2006 you claimed £40 for the cost of your summons for non-payment of council tax. Why did you do this?
* Between 2007 and 2008 you claimed £12,000 for a new kitchen. Why did you do this?
* In 2005 you attempted to claim £2,499 for a television. Why did you do this?
* In 2006 you claimed £750 for a television and £140 for a video recorder. Why did you do this?
* In 2008, after buying a coffee table for your London flat, you bought another coffee table for £119, which was sent to your address in Powys. Was this coffee table for your London flat? If so, why did you need two, and why was it delivered to Wales?

We do not presently see the justification for all these claims under the rules or spirit of the rules set out in the Green Book. Please could we receive your comments by 6pm today (Tuesday May 12th) so that they can be given due weight in our inquiries and properly reflected in any article we decide to publish. Please could you also inform us if you do not wish to comment.

I look forward to hearing from you shortly. I can be contacted on 020 **** **** or 07*** ***3 *** or by email.

Yours sincerely,
Jon Swaine

Dear Swaine,

As you will know, I reported my rental arrangement to the Fees Office. They made the requisite reduction in my Additional Cost Allowance, reducing it by exactly the same amount as the rent I got from the tenant. He did not make a contribution to the interest charges nor to the council tax. It follows that the arrangement actually saved the taxpayer thousands of pounds. I also paid tax on the rent, so I was WORSE off for having a tenant than I would have been if I had not had a tenant. I expect you to make clear this saving to the taxpayer in your article - and also the fact I could not have been doing this for profit because I made myself knowingly worse off by the arrangement. If in any way you suggest either impropriety, or that I did this for personal gain, or fail to show the benefit to the taxpayer of what I did, I shall take whatever action is necessary to force you to correct your error.

I fell behind with my council tax payment in 2006, causing the fine. This occurred shortly after my younger brother, Endel's , sudden death in November 2005. I fell behind with such matters at the time, as one sometimes does in such personally distressing situations. I trust you will not make fun of this or exploit it for your paper's ends. I am willing to pay back the £40.

I did not claim £12,000 for a new kitchen. This was the charge for the renovation of the entire property. I also had another quote which was considerably more expensive. This was the first major repair work done on the property in the 11 years since I'd moved in and dealt with damp, dilapidation, and many other issues. If you bothered to look at the correspondence you will see I even paid for items considered to be improvement out of my own pocket. The correspondence could not be more clear.

I was NEVER paid for the £2499 television and I never had this television in my flat. After consultation with the fees office, it was clear that this was above the accepted cost structure - it was also during a time of dissolution so the claim fell anyway. As a result of this guidance, I waited and once prices had come down I bought a smaller and cheaper television to replace the former rental television which I had bought second hand in 1997. The process therefore worked effectively and a much better value - for - money outcome resulted. I expect you to make clear that this is a good example of the process working well to everyone's benefit.

Both tables are in the London flat. You have again failed to look properly at the paperwork as they are not the same kind of table! Nor are they in the same room. It was not delivered to my Powys "address" if you mean my home. It was delivered to my constituency office and I brought it down by car, because this happened to be the most practical way to take delivery for this item. If you make any inference that I in any way attempted to purchase that table for my Wales residence, I will again take all necessary steps to force you to correct your error.

Lembit Öpik