| CHEMICAL THREAT |  | | | CASH BOOST | | | | CRIMESTOPPERS FAMILY FUN DAY | | | | MONEY STOLEN | | | | PICTURE GALLERY | | |
|
|
|
Sisters' pact over house
Sisters Joy and Sybil Burden have a pact that whoever lives the longest will set fire to their Ogbourne home to prevent Chancellor Gordon Brown getting any inheritance tax.
Last week the spinster sisters appealed to the European Court of Human Rights to be treated the same as lesbian and gay couples.
Same sex couples are treated the same as married couples and are exempt from having to pay inheritance tax if one of them dies.
However the exception does not extend to siblings and the Misses Burden have been fighting for more than 30 years to get the law changed.
Finally Joy, 88, and Sybil, 80, Burden turned to the court of human rights.
They were devastated when journalists phoned them at their home at Ogbourne St George to tell them they had lost their appeal.
The sisters designed the house they live in and which was built 40 years ago.
It cost them £7,000 at the time but it stands in 30 acres and today is worth £875,000.
The threshold for inheritance tax is £285,000 - rising to £300,000 next year - so if either of the sisters dies the other will be liable to pay the exchequer £185,000.
They have been aware of the injustice for siblings for more than 30 years but every attempt to get the law changed to get the same recognition for siblings as other couples has failed.
The pair have files inches thick of correspondence with the present Devizes MP Michael Ancram, his predecessor, the late Sir Charles Morrison, and just about every government office imaginable.
Sister Joy said: "This has been a blight on our lives for 32 years, there is no justice."
Sybil said: "All we are asking for is to be treated the same as couples living in the same situation.
"If we were a lesbian couple living together and one of us died then the survivor would not have to pay this tax."
The sisters said they had never taken a penny from the state and all they were asking for was to be treated the same as married couples or same sex couples.
They have three months in which to appeal against the Strasbourg court ruling but said they will be taking further advice before deciding what to do.
Their legal bills so far have come to more than £13,000 with another two lawyers bills still outstanding.
Joy Burden said: "Over the years we have come to understand more and more how corrupt this country has begun."
Their father Frank was a Methodist preacher besides being a farmer and he instilled in his sons and daughters a sense of justice and value.
The elder sister said: "If one of us dies then we have vowed that the other one will burn the house down rather than let Gordon Brown get his hands on this money.
The sisters are convinced that the establishment was able to influence the outcome of the court hearing.
"We had many people phoning us and writing to us before the hearing to say we were bound to win," said the 88 year old sister.
"This decision just shows how corrupt it all is."
Sybil Burden said: "If we went to the courts 1,000 times we would still lose under our present system."
The sisters smile at the advice they had in a letter from one young student. He suggested that one way around the law would be for them both to find husbands!
They said they were upset that people in Britain were being treated differently to those in other EC countries.
"Most of Europe has got rid of inheritance tax except Germany and France and in Germany the threshold is £2 million and £1.5 million France," said Joy Burden.
Not only do the sisters say they have a pact to burn their house down, they said they would have creosote sprayed over all their land to make it unusable to prevent the chancellor getting his hands on their money."
When we leave here the whole place will be a wreck," said the 88 year old.
8:20am Tuesday 19th December 2006
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Theresa, Swindon on 12:41pm Tue 19 Dec 06
Why don't you sell up and spend the money? Or you could sell up, split the money between you, give away the excess to charity (and gift-aid it at the same time, therefore kicking the chancellor in the groin) and leave the one left the amount just below the threshold. You would be better off enjoying it than putting yourselves through the misery of getting back at the taxman and one of you being left homeless. Just a thought...
Why don't you sell up and spend the money? Or you could sell up, split the money between you, give away the excess to charity (and gift-aid it at the same time, therefore kicking the chancellor in the groin) and leave the one left the amount just below the threshold. You would be better off enjoying it than putting yourselves through the misery of getting back at the taxman and one of you being left homeless. Just a thought...
Posted by: Mr Lachie Todd on 5:12pm Tue 19 Dec 06
I wonder how many tens of thousands of pounds these dear ladies have already spent on legal fees to guide their failed action through the Courts? I would guess, well in excess of the paltry £61,000 they are moaning about! There are no pockets in a shroud and John Wesley must be birling(turning)in his grave! Lachie Todd
I wonder how many tens of thousands of pounds these dear ladies have already spent on legal fees to guide their failed action through the Courts? I would guess, well in excess of the paltry £61,000 they are moaning about! There are no pockets in a shroud and John Wesley must be birling(turning)in his grave! Lachie Todd
Posted by: Greg on 10:18am Thu 21 Dec 06
They've been writing letters, not spending money on lawyers.
They wrote to the European Court, which decided to take the case, at no cost to these ladies.
The insane thing here is the way in which the housing market and planning laws have combined to give an apparent "value" to their property.
In reality, this "value" makes no difference to the way they choose to live their lives, which fundamentally questions the common understanding of "wealth" - here it is not the price you put on their house, but in their way of life.
Abstract price from this story, and it is about a fundamental injustice. The law makes concession to one choice of life - being married - but not to another, equally valuable choice.
They've been writing letters, not spending money on lawyers.
They wrote to the European Court, which decided to take the case, at no cost to these ladies.
The insane thing here is the way in which the housing market and planning laws have combined to give an apparent "value" to their property.
In reality, this "value" makes no difference to the way they choose to live their lives, which fundamentally questions the common understanding of "wealth" - here it is not the price you put on their house, but in their way of life.
Abstract price from this story, and it is about a fundamental injustice. The law makes concession to one choice of life - being married - but not to another, equally valuable choice.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
