HC Deb 18 July 1944 vol 402 cc17-9
32. Mr. Hutchinson

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will amend the War Damage Private Chattels Scheme so that, where several articles are insured under a single policy and a valuation of the articles insured accompanies the policy and is accepted by his Department, the Board shall be liable for the declared value of each article and their liability no longer restricted as at present to £50 or five per cent. of the total sum insured.

Mr. Dalton

No, Sir. This and other limitations of liability have operated since the scheme was introduced more than three years ago, and have been accepted by the public as reasonable.

Mr. Hutchinson

In view of the fact that this limitation has now been in operation for three years, and in view of the additional experience which my right hon. Friend's Department has acquired in working it, does he not agree that the time has come when this matter might be reconsidered?

Mr. Dalton

No, Sir, I think a very strong case can be made out for this limitation. It is possible for a person who insures up to the maximum of £10,000 to obtain, as my hon. and learned Friend indicated in his Question, £500 in compensation, if the article is sufficiently valuable. The purpose of the limitation is to guard the State and the public from having to pay large sums of money to people who lose works of art and valu- able objects as a result of enemy action. The better course is to place these objects in a safe place, which is not difficult to do. The purpose of this scheme is to reimburse people of moderate means for the loss of essential articles, and not of highly-priced articles.

Mr. Hutchinson

Is it not one of the consequences of this restriction that in order to obtain insurance of the full value of an article over £50 in value or exceeding 5 per cent. of the total value insured considerable over-insurance has to take place?

Mr. Dalton

I do not think so. I should be very glad to discuss the matter further with my hon. and learned Friend, but I have already gone into it very carefully.

Mr. Hutchinson

I beg to give notice, in view of that reply, that I will raise this matter on the Adjournment.

36. Sir Waldron Smithers

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will consider the advisability of extending the period of 30 days for the submission of claims for war damage.

Mr. Dalton

Experience shows that normally this period is sufficient, but I am always prepared to extend it, in particular instances, if a reasonable case is made.

Sir W. Smithers

The Minister used the word "normally"; does he realise that, owing to enemy action and evacuation in some cases, it is not always possible to gets the claims in within 30 days? Will he tell his officials to give this matter consideration?

Mr. Dalton

Yes, Sir; in fact, I have already issued instructions that where cases present difficulties, the period should be extended beyond 30 days. I would like to point out to my hon. Friend that it is in the interests of those who have suffered damage from enemy action to get their claims in quickly, because matters can then be checked up more readily with the valuers.

Mr. Bellenger

Is my right hon. Friend aware that an extension of time can only be obtained by a private individual swearing an affidavit before a Commissioner for Oaths, and paying for it, too? Can he not waive that formality?

Mr. Dalton

I think my hon. Friend is misinformed on that point but I will look into it.