HC Deb 26 July 1935 vol 304 cc2204-5

Lords Amendment: In page 53, line 12, at the end, insert: Provided that a payment under this section shall not in any case exceed the difference between the full value of the house (that is to say the amount which would have been payable as compensation if it had been purchased compulsorily but not as being unfit for human habitation) and the site value thereof (that is to say the amount which is payable as compensation by virtue of its being purchased compulsorily as being unfit for human habitation, or which would have been so payable if it had been so purchased), and any question as to such value shall be determined, in default of agreement, as if it had been a question of disputed compensation arising on such a purchase.

12.29 p.m.


I beg to move, "That this House cloth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

In another place various Amendments were proposed designed to limit the amount of payments which might be made in the circumstances of the Clause to an owner of a well-maintained house. The fear was expressed that, unless there was a limit of some sort imposed, the amounts might in some cases prove excessive, even to the extent that the total sums received by an owner might exceed the market value of his house. This would be an indefensible result, and I do not think that it would have the support of anybody in any quarter. The Amendment provides in terms that the market value of the house is to be the upper limit of the total payments received by an owner in respect of the house. I think that it is a very necessary Amendment.


I must point out that the Amendment raises a question of privilege.

Question put, and agreed to. [Special entry.]

Subsequent Lords Amendments to page 53, line 40, agreed to.