§ Lords Amendment: No. 8, in page 5, line 38, leave out Clause 4 and insert the following new Clause:
§ "4.—(1) if the owner of a protected site on which a mobile home is, or is to be, stationed—
- (a) fails without reasonable excuse to comply with the provisions of section 1 of this Act; or
- (b) having in compliance with the said provisions offered to the occupier an agreement on terms and conditions which have been accepted by the occupier, fails without reasonable excuse to enter into a written agreement with the occupier to give effect to the terms and conditions so agreed within the period of one month following the date of such acceptance,
§ (2) On an application under subsection (() above the court shall make an order for the grant of an agreement which—
- (a) in a case falling within paragraph (a) of that subsection, complies with section 3 of this Act and contains such terms and conditions as the court thinks reasonable; or
- (b) in a case falling within paragraph (b) of that subsection—
- (i) where the court is satisfied that terms and conditions have been agreed between the parties, contains the terms and conditions so agreed; or
- (ii) where the court is not so satisfied, complies with section 3 of this Act and contains such terms and conditions as the court thinks reasonable.
§ (3) If an occupier to whom an agreement has been offered by an owner of a protected site in pursuance of a duty under section 1 of this Act fails without reasonable excuse to signify within the period of three months following the date on which the agreement is so offered whether or not the terms and conditions contained in it are acceptable to him, the owner of the protected site may apply to the court for the grant of an agreement which complies with section 3 of this Act.
§ (4) On an application under subsection (3) above the court shall make an order for the grant of an agreement which complies with section 3 of this Act and contains such terms and conditions as the court thinks reasonable.
§ (5) An occupier who is dissatisfied with any of the terms or conditions in an agreement offered to him by an owner in pursuance of a duty imposed under section 1 of this Act may, within the period of three months following the date on which the agreement is so offered, apply to the court for the determination of the matter in dispute.
970§ (6) Where an agreement has been entered into in pursuance of section 1 of this Act or has been granted by virtue of an order of the court under this section either party may apply to the court for the determination of any matter in dispute arising under the terms of the agreement.
§ (7) On an application under subsection (5) or subsection (6) above the court shall determine the matter in dispute and shall make such order as is necessary to give effect to its determination.
§ (8) Where on an application made under this subsection by the owner of a protected site the court is satisfied that an occupier does not occupy as his only or main residence a mobile home which is stationed on that site by virtue of an agreement entered into in pursuance of section 1 of this Act or granted by virtue of an order of the court under this section, the court may make an order rescinding the agreement on such terms as to payment by or to either party of damages for the nonperformance of the agreement, or otherwise, as to the court may seem equitable."
§ Mr. Tom KingI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.
As the Minister said, some of these amendments look fearsome and fairly substantial. However, when carefully studied, their main effects will be seen to be limited. There is not such a substantial change to Clause 4 as might be inferred from a quick glance.
The key change in this part of the Bill relating to disputes concerns the facility for an occupier, if a court has granted or imposed an agreement, to ask for that agreement to be revoked. This matter caused great concern. It has now been pointed out that, as it is open to the tenant to give 28 days' notice and as it is unlikely that a revocation order will be issued by a court in less than that time, there is no point in having a revocation order procedure because the tenant has freedom to give notice.
This is a sensible improvement which alleviates the concern of site owners.
§ Question put and agreed to.