§ Sir A. FELLasked the Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the excessive delay in the settlement of claims for dilapidations occasioned by the military occupation of premises in the East Coast towns; if one house agent named William Gambling, of Great Yarmouth, has twenty-eight claims for the sum of £9,419 unsettled; if these premises were vacated in February, March, and April of this year, and are in such a condition that they are uninhabitable and have been vacant ever since, although tenants would take them at once when repaired; if the claims put in for these dilapidations last spring and summer have now greatly increased since the rise in prices; if any attempted settlements of the 690W claims locally are invariably turned down by the higher officials in London; and what steps he can take to put an end to the deadlock and the serious losses being sustained?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI would refer my hon. Friend to the replies given to similar questions of his on the 3rd and 30th June last. I am informed- that the delay in settlement In Mr. Gambling's case is due to the fact that he is claiming sums which, in the opinion of the Department, are excessive, and based on principles of assessment which cannot be admitted. It is not the fact that settlements attempted locally are "invariably turned down." by the higher officials in London. On the contrary those officials have offered under certain conditions to consider the question of referring to arbitration, but no reply to this suggestion has been received. I agree that it is unfortunate if property owners are put to extra expense owing to the attitude adopted by their agent, but I am afraid I cannot admit, as my hon. Friend appears to suggest, that owners are entitled to leave their premises unrepaired indefinitely and then claim for the extra losses resulting.