Surely by now we all know about the labour MP Jim Devine's claims for office shelving and the electrical work he had done on his London flat supported by a dodgy invoice, but now Mr Devine has been asked to explain why he claimed for a new bathroom after it was flooded - despite having buildings insurance.
Actually it's worse than that. Mr Devine billed the taxpayer twice within a year for the same bathroom in his publicly-funded London flat. He claimed £1350 for a 'replacement shower, paint and tiles' in June 2008, followed by a £1632 upgrade eight months later. The second refurbishment was necessary due to a flood Mr Devine is reported to have said.
Now I won't suggest you guess who paid his buildings insurance because you must know. Aye, we did.
The Met launched an inquiry into Mr Devine's previous claims and the investigation is still ongoing.
A labour spokesperson said: "Mr Devine was barred from being a labour candidate as a result of our internal process set up after the publication of MPs' expenses. He will not be standing at the next election."
Slightly inaccurate comment from the spokesperson (don't you hate that word? Why can't they say spokesman or spokeswoman?). Jim Devine could stand as an independent.
That aside, are the Met drawing out this inquiry so as their findings are publicised just before the general election is announced?
More importantly, if Mr Devine is found guilty of fraud, will he receive his 'golden handshake' and handsome pension just like Derek Conway? Westminster is indeed a club and not one over which the electorate has any control. We should be setting their rules and salaries, not them.
Incidents like this will continue no doubt, particularly when the punishment is so minimal. If the offender's pay-offs and pensions were affected, maybe then we would see an end to some politicians treating the electorate with contempt.