§ Mr. Heddleasked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will set out the categories of claimants for compensation for coal mining subsidence damage who are able to claim for all damage, including consequential loss and depreciation in value of property, and those who are able to claim lesser proportions of damage; if it remains his policy that there should be differences between categories of eligibility; and if he will give the reasons therefor.
§ Mr. John MooreDetailed information regarding rights to compensation for subsidence damage which may exist other than by virtue of the Coal Mining (Subsidence) Act 1957 or section 2(4) of the Coal Industry Act 1975 is not held by my Department. In some cases, whether such rights exist can only be determined by the courts. The Government believe that the 1957 and 1975 Acts make reasonable general provision for compensation for subsidence damage, but that it would be wrong to extinguish other rights to compensation which may exist in particular cases.
§ Mr. Heddleasked the Secretary of State for Energy (1) if he will list those areas of the United Kingdom where the National Coal Board is obliged to pay compensation for all coal mining subsidence damage, including consequential loss and depreciation in value of property;
(2) what publicity arrangements exist in those areas where the National Coal Board is obliged to pay compensation for all coal mining subsidence damage, including consequential loss and depreciation in value of property, for informing potential claimants that they are entitled to claim for any items under these headings.
§ Mr. John MooreProvisions relating to compensation for subsidence damage were sometimes included in the arrangements whereby the NCB or its predecessors acquired rights to work coal. The board tells me that in some areas of Stoke-on-Trent, Newcastle-under-Lyme and Cannock these provisions require the board to pay compensation for all damage, including consequential loss and depreciation in value.
The NCB tells me that the information it sends out about how to claim for subsidence damage refers to the possibility of a claimant having a remedy other than under 234W the Coal Mining (Subsidence) Act 1957. The board has recently made additional arrangements to ensure that claimants whose property is located in areas affected by court orders relating to parts of Stoke-on-Trent, Newcastle-under-Lyme and Cannock are informed of rights under them.
§ Mr. Heddleasked the Secretary of State for Energy (1) why the National Coal Board generally make only a contribution towards the fees of surveyors employed by persons claiming compensation for coal mining subsidence damage, as opposed to meeting the fees in full; and if he will indicate if he is satisfied with these arrangements;
(2) whether all owners and occupiers of land likely to be affected by coal mining subsidence are given individual notice immediately in advance of the commencement by the National Coal Board of those operations considered likely to result in such subsidence;
(3) if he is satisfied that all claimants for compensation under the Coal Mining (Subsidence) Act 1957 and the code of practice on compensation for mining subsidence damage introduced in 1976 are being treated fairly and on a consistent basis in each area of the National Coal Board.
§ Mr. John MooreI understand that in practice the board generally repays the full amount of a claimant's surveyor's fees. The formula for repayment was devised in 1978 in collaboration with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. I am satisfied that it is an appropriate arrangement.
The answer to the second question is "No". The board gives advance notice of future workings by publication of statutory notices under section 2 of the Coal Industry Act 1975.
The answer to the third question is "Yes". The rights under the Coal Mining (Subsidence) Act 1957 and the code of practice are available throughout Great Britain and I am satisfied that the board treats claimants under them on a fair and consistent basis.