§ 52. Sir Irving Alberyasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can give an 1283 assurance that owners of small houses which are being reconstructed on a cost-of-works basis will be encouraged to omit obsolescent and uneconomical features whilst not increasing what would have been the cost of complete duplication of the original building.
§ Sir J. AndersonWhere the appropriate payment to be made by the War Damage Commission is a cost-of-works payment it is primarily for the owner of the house to decide whether he will reinstate the property as it was before the war damage or will make the damage good by works which include alterations and additions. In the latter case the owner may still receive a cost-of-works payment but the amount is, of course, limited to the amount which would have been payable had the house been reinstated in its pre-damage form. In either case, however, the War Damage Act provides that the Commission shall not make any payment in respect of the reinstatement of any part which could have been omitted without detracting from the value of the house. Unless the alterations and additions are minor, the owner will be well advised to consult the War Damage Commission since the amount of the payment by the Commission may be affected.
§ Sir I. AlberyMay I ask my right hon. Friend whether he will take steps to encourage persons who are having what would otherwise be obsolescent houses rebuilt under the War Damage Act, to omit parts of the original building which would be obsolescent and therefore obviously undesirable?
§ Sir J. AndersonI am disposed to agree with my hon. Friend and I will certainly take the point up with the Chairman of the Commission.