SOLDIER TENANTS

Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 1, 26 September 1921, Page 8

SOLDIER TENANTS

EJECTION FROM HOUSES AMENDING LEGISLATION DESIRED The executive of the New Zealand Returned Soldiers’ Association on Satin day discussed the question of the right of landlords to eject soldiqr tenants. The Minister had informed the executive that the following remit would be considered by the Government; That tho war legislation protecting returned soldiers from ejection from rented properties be extended for 8( further twelve months from December 31 19-1, provia ed that where a returned soldiex purchased a house, of which another.returned soldier was tho tenant, the War Legislation and Housing Acts he amend- / „a to enable tho purchaser of such ™ to aPpIT to the Court for an R Rr of S, and that the Magis?rShav e o s>wer’to make such an ord The Canterbury Association fo ™ a^ the Act, providing preDon Hom rented of a clause — e ie andlord ajW these regulations results ‘"Mn Lc e ad h ley d S'that in his experience working of the Act benefited the majority of returned soldiers However, E were cases of hardship to landlords, and the proposal gave such people the right of appeal to a Magistrate. He cited a case where a landlord caused hardship through a returned soldier declining to give up occupation of! ahouse. Mr M'Donald remarked that Air. Leadiey had said that the working of the Act had benefited the soldiers generalTy and now h> Wanted to turg. around and’ alter it because of one md’.odual who wanted a house from a returned sold*Mr. Leadiey: You. ari? deliberately misrepresenting the position.Mr. M'Donald rose to a point of order, and at the request of the chairman Mr. Leadiey withdrew the word delibM Mn" M'Donald: AVe are here to look after tho interests of soldiers as a whole and not just one or two individuals. Mr. Fair saiffijio took it that the proposal was that a soldier who acted unfairly regarding the occupation of a house should be taken before a .Magistrate. He Thought that the decisions of Magistrates as a whole regarding these tenancy cases had given a great amount of satisfaction. Ho supported the proposal because he thought* it would show that returned soldiers were acting fanlv for others as well as themselves Further with the right of appeal, landlords would not have the same .hesitation as they had now in letting houses to returned soldiers. The chairman thought it would be better to defer further .consideration until a definite reply had been received from -the Minister. The time was coming when the legal right of. soldiers to remain in a house required by the landlord would be taken away. It was decided to refiir the matter to a special committee consisting of Messrs. Smith,- Fair, and Johnson. Mr. N. S. Johnsoij made a verbal report on the eviction of tenants. The committee, ho said, recommended tire insertion of clauses in J the AVar Regulation and StatutezLaw >Amendment Act, 1918, giving a returned soldier landlord, his wife, or his widow the right to institute proceedings for the possession of his property against a returned soldier tenant. A second recommendation was that, a civilian owner should have pos- ’ session when possession by a soldier tenant was .contrary to equity and good tonscience, or inflicted undue hardship on the owner, provided that the eviction order does not inflict any hardship on tho tenant.

Mr. T. Long inquired from the secretary if he had any information jis to the number of soldier settlers who werfc throwing up their sections, and as to.the, methods adopted by the Lands Department in inducing other returned men. to take 'up those sections. .He knew; he said, that sections abandoned by some settlers had been taken up by others, who found themselves loaded up with arrears of rent that had accrued from the previous lease. The president remarked that surely that could not be the case. ,> Mr. D. S. Smith endorsed Mr. Long’s ■statement. / . : Mr. Long, in the absence of information from the general secretary, said he would like general sub-committee to take the matter up. Mr. Smith instanced a case that had come under his notice in the Hawke's Bay district in which the trustees of\n certain estate had been unable' to understand bow the price had been forced up so high. The Government, for some reason, would give no information—it declined to show the basis on which tho land was valued. If it was trying to cover up any ntismanagement the association should see that 'the matter,was brought np in the House. The complaint was referred to the standing sub-commiitee for investigation.