HC Deb 24 March 1920 vol 127 cc443-4W
Mr. G. W. H. JONES

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Air Raid Compensation Committee limit the compensation payable to owners of leases containing a repairing covenant, to the market value of their interest in such leases; whether he is aware that, as a consequence, the amount of compensation is sometimes far less than the actual loss sustained by such owners; whether his attention has been called to the case of Mrs. Gamon, the owner of 109, Parkington Street, London, to whom the Committee, owing to the said limitation, awarded £170 for the balance of admitted actual damage of £460, and who is, therefore, personally responsible for the difference of £290; and whether, in the case of Mrs. Gamon and persons similarly situated, he will take steps to ensure that compensation shall be paid by the Committee on an indemnity basis?


It was decided that the Air Raid Compensation Scheme did not extend to cover loss arising out of liabilities incurred by any person in respect of the property of others as, for example, liabilities incurred under the covenants of a lease. In the case of Mrs. Gamon the total agreed amount of the damage to the building of 109, Packing-ton Street, Islington, was £860. Mrs. Gamon had insured the property for £400 under the Government insurance scheme, and was paid £400. She then applied under the Air Raid Compensation Scheme and, the value of her leasehold interest at the time of the damage being £170, that amount was paid. The Air Raid Compensation Committee stated that they were prepared to consider a claim from the freeholders in respect of their interest, as owners, in the property, provided that they were qualified, under the conditions of the scheme, to apply for compensation, but no application was made. I am unable to agree that any further compensation under the scheme is due to Mrs. Gamon.