View report page

55
rapidly becoming worse. It indicates rather that house inspections are
becoming more intensive. It should not be necessary to explain that
such items as the temporary breakdown of the flushing apparatus of a
w.c. renders a house not in all respects fit for habitation. Half an hour's
work should relieve the house of such a stigma. Again, a leaky roof,
causing extensive dampness, is another defect which, when remedied,
removes the cause of the insanitary condition which made the house not
in all respects, etc., etc. In all 053 instances the defects in question were
made good. This point appears to require emphasis in order to avoid
confusion with that other category referred to in Sections 9, 10, 11 and 12
of the same Act, which refers to houses found to be in a state so dangerous
or injurious to health as to be unfit for human habitation. Three
dwellings were found which, although the inmates were living both
happily and well, were thoroughly unsatisfactory in their internal
structure and lack of conveniences, and thus came dangerously near to
being declared in terms of Section 9. In one case the owners, without
formal notice, made structural alterations sufficient to remove the
anticipated embargo; in the other two cases the premises were vacated by
the tenants, and an undertaking was given that the premises would not
again be used for living purposes. In another instance a basement room
was so deficient in light, and so generally dilapidated, that it fell within
this category. Its use as a habitable room was discontinued, and it was
altered to serve as a wash-house.
A formal complaint under Section 10 of the Housing Act, 1925, was
received in February. It concerned 20 houses in the Victoria Ward.
As required by the Act, the properties were visited forthwith by the
Medical Officer of Health, and a full report was prepared and considered by
the Public Health Committee. A copy of the complaint was forwarded
to the London County Council as required under Section 25 of the Housing
Act. The complaint alleged that these 20 houses were so dangerous or
injurious to health as to be unfit for human habitation. It was further
submitted that all the houses were more or less damp, verminous and
dirty. Defects requiring the service of intimation notices were found in
all instances, and in eight statutory notices were necessary before the
defects were made good. In the case of two houses belonging to the
same owner, the statutory notices had not been complied with within the
stated period, and legal proceedings were taken to enforce compliance
with the terms of the notices. Obvious signs of vermin were found only
in three, but it must be remembered that the inspections were carried out
in winter, when such conditions more or less lie dormant. Although none
of the houses was fit in "all" respects (as explained above), yet only
in two were the conditions such as to render them "unfit for human