HC Deb 10 May 1923 vol 163 cc2620-1W
Mr. TURNER

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware of the claim of Mrs. Grey, of County Clare, Ireland, in respect of a Calthrop two-seater car seized by a party of auxiliary police in February, 1921; whether the car in question had been purchased by Mrs. Grey a few months prior to its seizure for £560, but had been only slightly used owing to its being deprived of an essential part by the district inspector of police; that in May, 1921, it was stated that the car would be returned to her and that a claim for damage to the car would be considered; that Mrs. Grey was informed in December, 1921, that an order had been made for the return of the car and the payment to her of £150 compensation; that Mrs. Grey received this sum without prejudice to further claims, and after receiving expert advice that the damaged car was worth between £175 and £200 actually sold it for £150; that the Irish Office stated in subsequent correspondence with Mr. Grey that the £150 represented reasonable compensation for the loss sustained taking into consideration the value of the car when returned, and the price for which a new one could now (October, 1922), be purchased, and that Mr. Grey ascertained that the price of a Calthrop two-seater car in October, 1922, was £465, and pointed out that valuing the returned car as being worth £200 Mrs. Grey was still entitled to receive £115; and the reason why the further £115 has not been paid?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

The reply to the first, third, fourth and sixth parts of the question is in the affirmative, and as regards the second and fifth parts I have no reason to doubt that the facts are as stated. As regards the seventh part, the sum of £150 paid asex gratia compensation to Mrs. Grey was based on expert advice to the effect that £110 was fair compensation in respect of depreciation and £40 in respect of user; and in view of the fact that it appears from the Calthorpe price list that new two-seater Calthorpes could be bought in October, 1922, at prices ranging from 285 guineas to 410 guineas, I have no reason to suppose that the amount of compensation was unfair. I am not prepared to reopen the matter.