Not sure if this should go into General Questions or Great Debates. It appears that one of men responsible for recent suicide bombings in London left behind a not inconsiderable estate.
He was 22 years old and worked in a chipper (a fast food shop). It does not appear that he had any additional sources of income. Several thoughts/questions:
Where did he get this money from?
Should the assets of his estate be frozen to compensate the victims of the attack?
Should the assest of his estate be frozen to allow the government to track the money to see where it came from?
If I was a victim (or a member of a victim’s family), I wouldn’t accept it. Chances are it’s dirty money connected with a terrorist organisation. It would be better to attempt to trace where it came from.
£120m isn’t a fortune. It could be amassed over several years by anyone who’s more-than-careful with their money.
Yes, if there’s a likelihood the money is connected to criminal activity, there should be procedures in place for this to be investigated. But ultimately, if the money is legitimate, it should be treated the same as any other inheritance. To do otherwise would be to punish the family of the man, for a crime they did not commit.
One would expect that claims will be made against the estate (if they have not already been) by the victims of the bombing. Such claims, if proven, would be payable out of the estate before any residual would be distributed.
CICA compensation does not require a criminal conviction (s.10). CICA compensation is not a bar to a civil claim (s.48(c)). Civil claims generally are not barred by death – they proceed against the deceased’s estate.
That amount divided by what could be a large number of claimants would result in damages awards that would for the most part remain unsatisfied, and which would in any event be set off against CICA compensation, so as far as distribution of the sum goes, it is non-story.
What might be a story would be the young fellow’s source of such funds, for most 22 year olds would not have anywhere near that high a net worth. Was he a brilliant young entrepreneur, or had he received a significant inheritance, or were the funds from a more sinister source? Tracing the source of the funds might be very enlightening.
I didn’t dispute either of these facts, although maybe I wasn’t clear about it. But the CICA is in part intended to remove the need to make civil claims.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article337244.ece
Looking back to the OP’s three questions, the answer to (1) has to be “We don’t know, and we need to find out whether or not it was legitimate”, and to (3) it’s “Yes, obviously!” Only (2) seems to me to be debate-worthy, and I stand by my first post in this respect.
Another point I found elsewhere while googling this…£120k may sound like a big sum, but it’s actually less than halfway to the inheritance tax threshold. In other words, it’s regarded by the taxman as being too small to bother with…
It’s not particularly common for 22 yr old chipshop workers to be able to afford a house, but it’s certainly not unusual - especially in urban centres such as Leeds, where there are many homes available for a knock-down rate (often homes previously owned by a local authority). A £5k car plus a few grand in household possessions, leave £100k for a house (ie. peanuts, to be blunt).
I think you might have to drop this one as a source of mystery - £110k doesn’t go as far as you might expect in the UK these days.
That’s rather the point about averages… you have some values above and some below :rolleyes:
An average terrace in Leeds is £120k, so a terrace in a predominantly muslim area is likely to be less than the average* - about £7k in this case, which isn’t that much.
All speculation really - no evidence that he had his own house - but my point was that it’s not like the lad was sitting on untold millions, so no great conspiracy needed.
But you could only count the full value of the house if he owned it with no mortgage. That would be unusual for any 22 year old, let alone a chip shop worker.
In Ireland it’s a chipper. Being Irish that’s the phase I would use. That said, it’s a London ‘chippy’ so I’ll defer to you. No offense taken by the way!
We’re talking about net worth. When calculating net worth, you start with the assets and then subrract the debts. For example, take the value of a person’s home, and then subtract what the person still owes on it.
If the fellow worked in the chip shop in Leeds full time since he was 12, and saved every single penny, then he would have such a net worth. I submit that few people do this. If, as a chip shop worker in Leeds, he purchased a home while still a youth and rode out the market increase, then he might have such a net worth, but again I submit that few youth do this.
Quite simply, I submit that if a typical 22 year old chip shop worker in Leeds were to liquidate all assets and pay off all debts, the resulting net worth would rarely come out to £120,000.
I expect that either the fellow had been given the money in the first place by his family as part of an income splitting tax avoidance practice (it being a family run chip shop), or else he received funds in support of his terrorist activities. Yes, these are speculations, but if I were the authorities, I would certainly want to trace the money.
