[janeymx]

Hi all,

Hoping that someone may be able to help / advise......

We have moved into a smallholding and are renting out 8 acres or so to a local farmer.  We have both signed an agreement to this (was based on a template contract from the local agents).  The farmer is asking if he can claim Single Payments on the land he rents from us.  In the contract there is a clause which says that no claim for Single Payment can be made by the licensee......

Is there a reason for this??  We are happy with the arrangement we have currently and are happy if the farmer can get something that he would be entitled to - but am guessing that the clause is in the contracts for a reason and don't want to open us up to any future problems / disputes.

Any thoughts appreciated (by the way, we are in Wales if it makes a difference to the schemes?)

Thanks in advance

Jane

[robert waddell]

who is the licensee(there used to be a glasgow gangster by that name)
was the land sold with single farm payment attached?
if the farmer can claim single farm payment he will efectivly be getting the land for free

[doganjo]

Janey, if the farmer is renting the land from you then he must be the licensee, and therefore is not entitled to the Single Farm Payment.  I don't know what the reason is unless you can maybe claim it yourself.  Why don't you ask the land agent you got the contract from?

[janeymx]

Hi

Yes the farmer is the licensee.  The land belongs to us and a new contract drawn up after we had bought the house/land so there is no ongoing rights.

I had read on Wikipedia that a farmer can claim for his own land or land he manages (if he has it available to him for ten months in the year) - this would be the case with us and hence not sure why it is in the contract to say he can't (unless Wiki p wasn't referring to Wales).

I'm not sure that we would have the right to the payment as I think it goes to the owner of the livestock on the land - but heh, what do I know

I'll give the agents a ring tomorrow as per suggestion - just wanted to sound out whether anyone had come across this.

Thanks

J

[robert waddell]

ah he rented the land before?
he has to adjust his claim forms if he was claiming before
wikipedia is correct
it is not  just
 livestock based although some of the payments are for livestock or having less livestock
our neighbour (retired not farming)rents his land out and the retired farmer gets the dosh

[doganjo]

I was just applying logic - and a wee bit of law from hundreds of years ago in Uni.  I would say you as landowner would be entitled to claim it, but you'd possibly have to have livestock - so if it is substantial, why not get yourself a CPH and some animals? Or ask the farmer for a part share in his animals, claim the payment and split it.

[bloomer]

from properties i have looked at renting normally the right to the single payment remains with the land lord who claims it and gets paid rent as well provided they fulfill certain obligations (the land must be in use on certain dates) i'm sure its more complicated but it certainly isn't to do with livestock as you can get SFP on arable land as well...

most farmers (from my research) appear to lose money on there crops/livestock the single payment is there profit!!!

[doganjo]

These should help

http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?itemId=1086418895&r.l1=1081597476&r.l2=1082184851&r.l3=1086568388&r.s=tl&type=PIP&tc=000KWBL2308320111016|7443998587

http://wales.gov.uk/topics/environmentcountryside/farmingandcountryside/farming/singlepaymentschemesps/spspublicationindex/saf2010rules/?lang=en

[janeymx]

Thanks very much everyone

J

[Hilarysmum]

I understand the ruling but it does seem so unfair.  A farmer buys and keeps his livestock for very little profit and at one time would have got a subsidy.  Now it goes to the land owner who could be Prince Charles or BP.  Neither of whom would benefit from the payments nearly as much as the farmer. 

Thats not a dig at you Janeymx or any other small landowner.

[BlueDaisy]

Round here I often see auctions advertised for single farm payments which don't appear to have any land attached
Maybe I'm reading it wrong (cos I really don't understand it) but I don't see how that can be ethical or legal???

[robert waddell]

blue daisey that is called naked acres

[janeymx]

I agree that the farmer should be the one who gets the payment - don't have a problem with that at all and agree with you.

Have been reading up more about it and it seems that farmers were allocated entitlements in 2005 as a one off exercise.  The farmer could therefore use his entitlements in order to claim SPS on our land if he has enough (you need one entitlement per hectare).  He has to have full management of the land though and be responsible for cross compliance etc.

We don't have any entitlements as we didn't have land / weren't farming in 2005 - but if we were to in future and wanted to claim SPS we could buy entitlements on the open market - which I assume is the naked acres that you are seeing at auction (i.e. entitlements but no land - to go with the land we would have, but no entitlements!)

Feel like I am emerging from a fog 

J

[doganjo]

Sounds like thick gungy mud to me - really clear - NOT!   Good luck!

[bazzais]

Single farm payments are not attached to specific land - but you do have to have land to apply it too in order to claim.

You can buy and sell single farm payments if you have the land to attach it too, it still maybe profitable to buy them even now the scheme will soon come to an end under its old rules.  Many farmers are buying sfp because they feel that a new scheme will be introduced.  Its even possible to make a few bucks if you buy them now.

Its scandalous that sfp can be traded - I am pretty sure it was not set up for this type of auctioning off.

Baz