HC Deb 30 November 1943 vol 395 cc197-9
53. Mr. McEntee

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware of the difficult position of owners of dwelling-houses when their property is completely destroyed by enemy action, owing to the continuing liability for repayments under mortgages granted by building societies; and will he take steps to relieve such owners from their responsibilities to continue to pay interest as payments envisaged by the War Damage Act, 1943, give full security to the building society for the money lent and the owner has the added expense of providing other accommodation for his family, or will he make arrangements for the War Damage Commission to pay the money owing on the claims and thus enable the owners to pay off the mortgage?

Sir J. Anderson

As my predecessor informed the House, he received assurances on behalf of building societies that they would extend the most sympathetic treatment possible to borrowers whose property has suffered war damage and that they would not ask the borrowers to pay more on account of their debt than was in the circumstances clearly within their resources. Moreover mortgagors who are unable to meet their liabilities in respect of war-damaged houses receive a measure of protection under the Courts (Emergency Powers) Acts and the Liabilities (Wartime Adjustment) Act. I should not feel justified in introducing legislation to give automatic relief to all mortgagors at the expense of their creditors. In answer to the last part of the Question I would point out that the fact that a dwelling house is completely destroyed by no means necessarily implies that it will not be qualified for a cost-of-works payment. I should not feel justified in anticipating the general release of value payments in this particular class of case, but I would refer the hon. Member to Section 22 (2) of the War Damage Act, 1943, which provides for the making of payments to persons in need of funds to secure alternative housing accommodation.

Mr. McEntee

Is it not very difficult for these people to get any concession from the building societies? Is it not true that they are more hard hit than any other section of the people who have had property destroyed, because they have to provide a new home for themselves, very often at an excessive rent? Could not the right hon. Gentleman make some concession to them?

Sir J. Anderson

There is no obvious reason why it should be made easier for people who have purchased houses with other people's money than for those who have purchased houses with their own money. So far as building societies are concerned, if the hon. Member will give me particulars of the case which has led to his Question, I will try to look into the matter.

Sir W. Davison

When is the Memorandum which was adumbrated in the Press that, although their houses were totally destroyed, the owners might yet be eligible for a cost-of-works payment, likely to be published?

Sir J. Anderson

That has been published.

Mr. R. C. Morrison

Has the right hon. Gentleman satisfied himself that the assurances given on behalf of the building societies cover the whole of the building societies?

Sir J. Anderson

I will look into the point.

Dr. Russell Thomas

Is not the Minister aware that the Courts (Emergency Powers) Act is no remedy at all because people do not go to these courts unless they are absolutely on their beam ends? Is this not very hard lines on mortgagors, and will he bear this matter in mind?

Sir J. Anderson

I have the point in mind.