§ Mr. KENNEDYasked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that, in connection with the removal to new premises of the subscribers to telephone service Central 4249, an undertaking was given to the firm concerned that the service at Hop 156 would be installed before that at Central 4249 was removed; why this undertaking was not carried out; whether the telephone apparatus and connections both at the old and the new premises were removed subsequent to the arrangements referred to; and whether, as the firm concerned has suffered loss and inconvenience through being deprived of telephonic communication, steps can be taken to prevent the waste of labour and material and the inconvenience to subscribers due to what appears to be a lack of co-ordination of the work of the Departments and districts concerned?
§ Mr. PEASEThe service would have been available at the new premises on the specified date but for the development of some faults on the circuit which delayed completion of the work. Owing to some misunderstanding, permission seems to have been given to a Post Officer fitter by a representative of the firm to recover the apparatus at the old premises before service was installed at the new address. The telephone apparatus in use by the former occupier of the new premises had been removed before any intimation was received of a new tenant.