HC Deb 30 March 1965 vol 709 cc208-9W
Mr. Ian Lloyd

asked the Postmaster-General if he will explain the circumstances in which a Post Office telephones van came to be involved in an accident on 5th November at the junction of Grove Road and Eastern Road, Farlington; how a Post Office employee came to be on an unauthorised journey during normal working hours; and why his Department has refused to accept any liability for damages arising from this accident.

Mr. Joseph Slater

At about 12.30 a.m. on 5th November, an unestablished garage assistant employed at the Telephone Exchange Centre Garage, Cosham, left his duty without permission and drove away a Post Office van on an unauthorised journey towards his home at Milton. On the way, at the junction of Grove Road and Eastern Road, Farlington, the van was in collision with a saloon car. Fortunately neither driver was seriously injured, but both vehicles were extensively damaged. The employment of the garage assistant has since been terminated by notice.

The Post Office has not refused to accept all liability for damages arising from this accident. On the facts of the matter the Post Office contends that it is under no legal liability whatsoever since the vehicle was being driven without authority. However, in accordance with the normal practice of Government Departments in such cases we have agreed to meet the claim for personal injuries.

The claim for the damage to Mr. Baker's car, other than the excess under his insurance policy, is, I understand, being dealt with by his insurers under a mutual forbearance and sharing agreement with the Treasury. With regard to any remaining items of damage, it is of course open to Mr. Baker to pursue his

Houses without
Fixed bath Running water Unfit Houses since demolished or closed Baths since installed with aid of Standard Improvement Grant
Heywood Borough 3,382 47 391 198
Royton U.D. 1,860 10 331 166
Crompton U.D. 1,888 12 118 162
Milnrow U.D. 1,136 25 58 194
Wardle U.D. 510 10 60 29
Littleborough U.D 1,694 19 29 104
Whitworth U.D. 1,472 15 173 64

It is not known how many baths have been installed without grant.

The Census Returns do not show how many houses are without an inside toilet and the figure is not otherwise available.