84. Mr. MACLEANasked the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that a practice has grown up in Glasgow of fore-handing rents contrary to custom and contract, to the prejudice of poor tenants; and whether he will take steps to deal with the situation?
§ The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Craigie Aitchison)A number of instances have recently been brought to my notice in which landlords have attempted to vary the terms of existing contracts of let by forehanding rent in the case of houses which come under the Kent Restrictions Acts. As the law at present stands, attempts of this kind can only be dealt with as raising questions of civil right. If further legislation should be required in the matter of rent restriction I propose to make representations to my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State, with a view to ensuring that attempts to vary the terms of such contracts to the prejudice of poor tenants should be created statutory offences cognoscible by the criminal courts.
Mr. MACLEANWhile thanking the Lord Advocate for his promise on behalf of the Government in the event of amending legislation being brought forward, I wish to ask what he is prepared to do in the meantime? Is he not aware that the courts in Glasgow are congested by cases in which tenants are being summoned to court on the allegation that they are in arrears with rent, although that is not in accord with the terms of letting?
§ The LORD ADVOCATEThose are matters which are not within my jurisdiction. If any alleged variation of existing contracts can be brought within the category of fraud it is possible for me to take action, but, if they cannot be brought within the category of fraud, I am afraid there is no remedy except the remedies which are specified by legislation.
Mr. MACLEANDoes not the Rent Restrictions Act, 1920, make it perfectly clear that a landlord cannot act in that way?