- (1) A landlord of a house to which the principal Act, either as originally enacted or as ex tended by this Act, applies shall, on being so requested by the tenant of the house, furnish to him a statement as to what is the standard rent of the house, and if he fails within fourteen days to do so, or furnishes a statement which is false in any material particular, he shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding ten pounds.
- (2) Where a person who has, since the thirtieth day of September, nineteen hundred and seven teen, purchased a house to which the principal Act, either as originally enacted or as extended by this Act, applies, requires the house for his own occupation or that of some person in his employ, or in the employ of some tenant from him, nothing in the Increase of Rent, etc. (Amendment) Act, 1918, shall be construed as preventing the Court from making an order for the recovery of possession of the house if, after considering all the circumstances of the case, including the alternative accommodation available for the tenant, the Court considers it reasonable to make such an order.
§ Mr. ADAMSONI beg to move, in Subsection (1), after the word "shall" ["shall, on being so requested"], to insert the words
provide the tenant of the house with particulars showing respectively the amounts paid for rent, rates, and any other charges, and.I think the necessity for this Amendment is so obvious that I do not require to give any reasons, and I hope the Attorney-General will see his way to accept it.
§ Mr. MACQUISTENMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman what is the purpose of this Amendment?
§ Mr. ADAMSONThe object that I have in view is to secure that the tenant shall be supplied with the particulars as to the amount of his rent, apart from the rates, the amount of his rates, and any other charges.
§ Mr. INSKIPDoes the right hon. Gentleman intend that these particulars shall be supplied whether or not they are re- 1241 quested by the tenant. I understand that the words are to come in before the words "on being so requested." I do suggest that they should tome in after those words, because it would be a hardship upon landlords to have to supply these particulars in all cases whether the tenant requires them or not.
§ Sir G. HEWARTI had not seen this Amendment until it was handed to me a few minutes ago by the right hon. Gentleman. It is a proposal to make it imperative upon the landlord in any event to supply these particulars. The Act goes on to provide that certain particulars shall be provided upon request. Let us see what are the particulars which my right hon. Friend says ought to be provided in any event. They are particulars showing the respective amounts paid for rent, rates, and any other charges. If that Amendment were adopted, the Clause would proceed to say that on being so requested by the tenant the landlord should furnish him with a statement as to the standard rent of the house. I really do not quite follow what is meant by the respective amounts paid for rent, rates, and any other charges. The amount paid for rent is that which, I presume, is paid by the tenant. The amount paid for rates is the amount paid either by the tenant, or in cases where the rates are compounded by the landlord on his behalf. Those matters are easily ascertainable, and, having regard to what is afterwards provided by the Clause, I should have thought that this Amendment is superfluous.
§ Mr. ADAMSONIf the right hon. Gentleman is satisfied that what I ask is already provided—
§ Sir G. HEWARTI think so.
§ Mr. ADAMSONAnd that it would be incumbent upon the landlord to provide the tenant with these particulars, I am quite willing to withdraw the Amendment.
§ Sir G. HEWARTI did not go so far as that. I said that this Amendment was either a mere repetition of what is provided afterwards and is therefore superfluous or that the information is easily within reach of the tenant as the Clause now stands.
Mr. T. WILSONAssuming the landlord builds a bathroom and says that it has cost him £100, surely the tenant has a right to know whether it has actually cost £100 or only £60?
§ Sir H. NIELDSurely the object of the Clause is to enable the tenant to know a fact which he does not necessarily know, namely, what was the standard rent on the day that the Act came into force? Therefore that is the one fact that the existing tenant might not be expected to know. Surely, in respect of everybody else he has the materials at his hand?
§ Mr. DANIEL WILSONI would draw the attention of the Committee to the fact that this is the first Clause of the Bill which makes a default a criminal offence. Failure on the part of the landlord to give these particulars will subject him to liability to a fine of £10. In the other Clause of this Bill a great deal is being done on behalf of the tenant to secure his rights, but in this case the Amendment makes it a criminal offence unless the landlord, in every case, supplies the tenant with particulars as to rents, rates, and other charges. No person on this Committee can possibly tell what the "other charges" are, and it would be very unfair. The landlord would not be doing any wrong to anyone, and to create a criminal offence in such a vague form as is suggested by the Amendment of the Leader of the Opposition would be a thing which surely has not being done before.
§ Mr. ADAMSONI am quite willing to withdraw the Amendment if the learned Attorney-General is willing to consider, before now and Report, whether this is needed.
§ Sir G. HEWARTI am quite willing to consider it, but I adhere to the observations I have made.
§ Mr. ADAMSONI withdraw.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Mr. N. M'LEANI beg to move, in Subsection (1), to leave out the word "ten" ["not exceeding ten pounds"] and to insert instead thereof the word "twenty."
At this late period of the sitting I will, content myself with merely moving the Amendment.
§ Sir G. HEWARTI should have thought that it was a sufficiently grave thing to make a failure to furnish these particulars a criminal offence. I really do not think that the difference between £10 and £20 is a matter which we need, seriously consider.
§ Amendment negatived.
1243Colonel THORNEI beg to move, at the end of Subsection (1), to insert as a new Sub-section,
(2) Notwithstanding anything in Sub-section (3) of Section one of the principal Act no order for the recovery of possession of a dwelling-house to which this Act applies, or for the ejectment of a tenant therefrom, shall be made so long as the tenant continues to pay rent at the agreed rate as modified by the principal Act or by this Act, and performs the other conditions of the tenancy, except on the ground that the tenant has been guilty of conduct which is a nuisance or an annoyance to adjoining or neighbouring occupiers, and where such order has been made, but not executed before the passing of this Act, the Court by which the order was made may, if it is of opinion that the order would not have been made if this Act bad been in operation at the date of the making of the order, rescind or vary the order in such manner as the Court may think fit for the purpose of giving effect to this Act.This Amendment, I think, explains itself. It is for the purpose of protecting, the tenants. We have hoard a great deal to-night and in days gone by about these tenants being victimised and put out of their houses for various reasons. This Clause will prevent the tenants being treated in that way from time to time.
§ Mr. RENDALLI do not think this Amendment is required. The tenant is fully protected under the Bill as it stands. The hon. and gallant Member has not given any reasons for the Amendment.
§ Mr. FISHERThe effect of the Amendment would be to exclude a man, to whom an eviction order might now be made, from obtaining possession of a house of which he wished to use for his own occupation or for the occupation of a person in his employ. The landlord ought to have a right to get rid of a tenant who is destroying his property, and the acceptance of this Amendment would render that impossible. As to the second part, the Amendment was carefully considered in 1918 and certain definite restrictions were inserted. As to the third point, the Mover of the Amendment ought to produce evidence that the proviso has worked unfairly. I think no sufficient grounds have been submitted to justify the acceptance of the Amendment.
§ Mr. ADAMSONIn view of the speech we have just heard, I feel we are bound to press this further on the attention of the Government and of the Committee. The fact that the employer of labour who has house property is in a more favourable position than the private owner is causing 1244 a considerable amount of dissatisfaction in industrial areas, in most of which in this country there is a serious shortage of housing. Yet employers of labour are asking liberty to eject tenants and are securing it. I am very sorry if we are interfering with the completion of the Committee stage, but this is such an important matter that we cannot allow it to pass without a few minutes' discussion, unless there is agreement to allow it to be more fully discussed on the Report stage.
§ Sir G. HEWARTMay I be allowed to make, a suggestion? We are approaching very nearly to eleven o'clock. Everybody, I think, is of opinion that this Bill should speedily be passed into law. Can we not, by the leave of the House, resume consideration after eleven o'clock?
§ The CHAIRMANIt is not yet eleven o'clock.
§ Mr. ADAMSONThe Act is working in such a way in industrial districts as to cause great dissatisfaction, and we want this Bill amended somewhat on the lines of our Amendment.
§ Mr. T. WILSONI do not think the right hon. Gentleman has done the Amendment justice.
§ It being eleven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
§ Committee report Progress.
§ Sir G. HEWARTI beg to move,
That this House will immediately again resolve itself into Committee on the Bill.I have made a suggestion in your absence, Mr. Speaker, that, in view of the urgency of this Bill, by leave of the House we might continue its consideration in Committee after 11 o'clock. I quite understand the restrictions under which that consideration will proceed, but I hope those restrictions may not prevent the further useful consideration of the Amendments on the Paper.
§ Bill accordingly again considered in Committee.
§ [Mr. WHITLEY in the Chair.]
§ Question again proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ Mr. T. WILSONMay we have some further statement from the Government on this Amendment?
§ Sir G. HEWARTMay I be allowed to add that I thought that the statement of the President of the Board of Education was very clear and very conclusive. But I have listened since then to the speech of my right hon. Friend (Mr. Adamson) and I shall be perfectly willing to consider this matter before Report.
§ Mr. WILSONMay I point out that one of the terms of the Amendment is that the tenant performs the conditions of the tenancy and takes every care of the property. The right hon. Gentleman has not given any reason why the Amendment should not be accepted. The words
tenant continues to pay the rent at the agreed late…and performs the other conditions of the tenancyprotect the landlord. This Amendment does justice to the tenant and to the landlord, and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will reconsider the matter now.
§ Mr. MADDOCKSIf one looks at Section 1, Sub-section (3) of the Increase of Rents Act, 1915, one will see what it is that my hon. Friends propose to cut out of the present Act. That Sub-section provides:
No order for the recovery of possession of a dwelling-house to which this Act applies or for the ejectment of a tenant there from shall be made so long as the tenant continues to pay rent at the agreed rate as modified by this Act and performs the; other conditions of the tenancy, except on the ground that the tenant has committed waste or has been guilty of conduct which is a nuisance or an annoyance to adjoining or neighboring occupiers, or that the premises are reasonably requited by the landlord for the occupation of himself or some other person in his employ of some tenant from him or some other ground which may be deemed satisfactory by the Court making such order.The object of the hon. Member who moved this is to cut out all that the landlord may desire to do, and to cut out the provision as to waste, and there can be only one object in that, and that is by cutting it out, so that the tenant may commit waste if he chooses. He may refuse to let the landlord have possession, even although the landlord may show to the satisfaction of the Court that he desires possession, and ought to have it, for some good purpose. Under these circumstances, it would be just as well to say to those who are pressing for this Amendment, "We really give the whole charge and control to the tenant at once, and leave the landlord out of all consideration whatever."
§ Mr. INSKIPMay I suggest one other reason why the Amendment should not be pressed? At present, so far as I understand, the landlord may only turn out a tenant who is a nuisance or an annoyance when there are retrospective covenants requiring him to go out if he commits acts of that sort. This Clause is drafted in such a way that it presumably enables a landlord to turn out a tenant who is not under any covenant with regard to other tenants of the same landlord, but it is an annoyance to tenants belonging to another estate altogether. In fact, it gives a fresh cause of action which I rather think my right hon. Friend docs not contemplate, and gives the landlord a power of annoying the tenant which he has not at present, namely, to say you are an annoyance not to my tenant but to someone else's tenant, and I shall bring an action against you to turn you out of the house.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Mr. ADAMSONI beg to move, at the end of Sub-section (1), to add the words,
Any person who offers to let a house on payment of a premium by the prospective tenant or accepts such a premium or any person who pays a premium in order to obtain possession of a house shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £20.To such an extent has this evil gone that we have offers openly made in the advertisement columns of newspapers of sums of £5 and £10.
§ Mr. ADAMSONPeople who are looking for a house in some cases are offering £5 or £10 to anyone who can find them one, and with a view to removing the evil that has arisen in this connection I move.
§ Sir G. HEWARTMy experience of this House is comparatively short, but I am bound to say that I have never before known a manuscript Amendment handed in which proposes to make a new criminal offence. It is a manuscript Amendment which not only proposes to make a new criminal offence, but proposes to make that an offence which is already prohibited by the Statute. I do seriously suggest to my right hon. Friend that this Amendment is not necessary. The Act as it stands is going to be enforced in spite of it, and it would be a very strong thing, upon such 1247 short notice, to make it a criminal offence for making an offer or doing something which the Statute already forbids.
§ Mr. N. M'LEANThe right hon. Gentleman says that this is making a criminal offence of something which is already provided for in the Act, but why should you not put some penalty on it, as has been done on the landlord? At the present time you have only to take up any of your London papers—the thing is more pronounced in the provinces—and you will find in the columns devoted to housing accommodation advertisements offering £5 or £10—in fact offering premiums—for those who can give information or give them entry to houses, or by means of key motley or otherwise, to enable them to get possession of a house. We want something to deal with that, we want to prevent the richer tenant or an individual who can afford to pay the premium and is prepared so to do, to be prevented, because in the first place that becomes an added charge upon the house. It is either a reward or an extra rent, according to who gets the premium. Either the outgoing tenant or the factor may get it. Smaller sums may be paid for key money. All these things are added charges upon the house; they make an increased rent which the tenant is prepared to pay. It penalises the poor tenant who is unable to offer a premium of any sort, and we want that particular thing to be stopped, and this manuscript Amendment seeks to do that. If the Government is prepared to accept it in some other form, well and good. The Attorney-General has told us that in the Act already there is a Clause which prevents this sort of thing. If so we would press upon him to make it a little more stringent, so as to prevent these people from penalising the poorer class of tenants.
§ Sir G. HEWARTI am quite sure my hon. Friend (Mr. N. M'Lean) has, for the moment, forgotten the provisions of the original Act. May I refer to it: Section 1, Sub-section 2, says:
A person shall, not, in consideration of the grant, renewal, or continuance of a tenancy of any dwelling-house to which this Act applies require the payment of any fine, premium, or other like sum in addition to the rent, and where any such payment has been made in respect of any such dwelling-house after the twenty-fifth day of November, nineteen hundred and fifteen, then the amount shall be recoverable by the 1248 tenant by whom it was made from the landlord, and may, without prejudice to any other method of recovery, be deducted from any rent payable by him to the landlord, but this provision shall not apply to any payment under an agreement entered into before the fourth day of August, nineteen hundred and fourteen.My observation was that this which is now sought to be made a penal offence is already prohibited. If an offer is made it is an idle offer. If it is accepted it is something which the Act already provides can be remedied, and it is unnecessary to make it a penal offence.
Captain SMITHWho is responsible for finding out the people who are using these newspapers and offering premiums to landlords, tenants, or anybody else? What steps will be taken to put the Act in operation in this respect?
§ Mr. ADAMSONMay I further draw attention to the fact that my Amendment seeks to make it a penal offence for anyone to offer, through newspapers or otherwise, premiums of £5 or £10, or any other sum, and that that part of the Amendment is not dealt with under the existing law.
§ Question put, "That those words be there added."
§ The CHAIRMANThis being opposed business, I must leave the Chair.
And, it being after Eleven of the clock, and objection being taken to further Proceeding, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
§ Committe report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.
§ The remaining Orders were read and postponed.
§ Whereupon Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 12th February, proposed the Question, "That this House do now adjourn."
§ Adjourned accordingly at Seventeen minutes after Eleven o'clock.