Report by the Joint committee of the House of Lords and the House of Commons on public sewers (contributions by frontagers) : together with the proceedings of the committee and minutes of evidence and speeches delivered by counsel.
- Great Britain. Parliament. Joint Committee on Public Sewers
- Date:
- 1936
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Report by the Joint committee of the House of Lords and the House of Commons on public sewers (contributions by frontagers) : together with the proceedings of the committee and minutes of evidence and speeches delivered by counsel. Source: Wellcome Collection.
120/126 (page 92)
![Mr. Tyldesley Jones. | time. Sir Henry Cautley.] The future use. Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| At the time he has a sewer constructed through a field. Mr. Wrottesley.| He pays at once. Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| He gets com- pensation at once. If we can show that there has been any enhancement of the value, we can set that off against the compensation for depreciation of his land, so that he gets paid for the net depre- ciation. If it is an open field, he obviously cannot use it, because he has no means of using that sewer, It can only mean that there will be enhancement. Now he constructs the road over the sewer. We now say: ‘‘ You are now going to have the use of that sewer. You have been paid compensation for our putting that sewer under your land. We are not going to ask you to give that back; whatever you have had, you keep that. You are going to have, in addition, now, the right to use the sewer, but you must pay for that sewer on the principle of frontage, just as you would pay if the sewer were now constructed.’’ But he says (and I come to the point the Hon- ourable Member was putting to me) ‘* You have already had the enhancement in value which my property has received up to the present owing to the construc- tion of the sewer’’, and we _ say: ‘‘ Certainly, and we shall deduct that from the expenses you would otherwise be asked to pay.’’ That is in this clause. You have not seen that. Would you look at page 15? Mr. Wrottesley.| I have drawn atten- tion to that. Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| Page 15: ‘ Pro- vided that (i) where any sum so appor- tioned and charged in respect of the expenses of construction of any sewer is recoverable from a person against whose compensation in respect of the carrying of the same sewer into through or under his lands an amount for enhancement of value has been set off in pursuance of the section of this Act whereof the marginal note is ‘ Benefits to be set off against compensation’ ’’ (that is Section 66) ‘the Amount so set off shall be deducted in arriving at the sum to be so appor- tioned and charged and_ recoverable.”’ Under this clause he is far better off than he would have been under the Private Street Works Act, if they waited to lay the sewer until after he had completed his road; because in that case we would lay the sewer after he had completed his Not at that [ Continued. 4H road, he would get no compensation, and he would have to pay the whole cost of the construction of the sewer through his land. If we lay a sewer before the construction of the street, he gets com- pensation for the net depreciation of his property. He keeps that for all time, and when (that is the important point) he makes use of the sewer for the purpose of development by constructing a street over it, then and then only is he asked to pay the apportioned amount of the costs of the sewer, but less any sum which was deducted on the former oecasion for the enhancement of his property due to the presence of the sewer. Sir Henry Cautley.] He is not being asked to pay twice over ? Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| No. Mr. Wrottesley.] I did not say twice over. That is not my argument. My learned friend says that I have said I have paid twice over. JI have paid the enhancement of my property to-day. You have had that and the interest on it for 10 years, and then you make me pay the rest of the necessary money to con- struct the sewer. Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| That cannot be right. Here is a sewer made over a man’s land. We will say it costs £1,000. It is ridiculous to suggest that the construc- tion of a sewer of £1,000 sends the value of his property up by £1,000, if it is not property in course of development. Of course it does not. The enhancement of his property would be something very small under those conditions, and that enhancement is not paid by him. That enhancement has merely to be used to diminish any compensation he would otherwise get. That is the mistake my learned friend makes; he does not pay us one farthing. Chairman. | tions. Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| Yes. Chairman.] - You pay first for the nuisance created by the wayleave? Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| Yes. Chairman.| ‘When you construct the sewer, the person benefited is asked to pay the cost? Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| Yes. landowner compensation. Chairman.| That he keeps. Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| Yes, that closes the transaction. Mr. Wrottesley.| I do not agree to that. The Jandowner at that time has deducted from what he has received the enhancement of his land, There are two transac- I pay the](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b32186022_0120.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
