View report page

26
ing" went on for some time, and it was nine months after the date
of the original complaint that the roof was satisfactorily repaired.
The waste of time and trouble experienced by the department
is shown by the fact that in order to get these premises put into
passable condition it was found necessary to serve notices under
the Public Health (London) Act, and to issue a Rent Restrictions Act
Certificate, whilst the District Surveyor also had to serve and enforce
a Notice. 23 visits were paid by the sanitary staff, and in
addition to the service of Notices there were, of course, reports to
the Committees and correspondence.
It was owners such as this who were among the most clamorous
in condemning the existence of the Rent Restrictions Acts, complaining
that whilst they were most anxious to remove the evils
of bad housing they were powerless to deal with dirty tenants and
overcrowded houses so long as these Acts remained in force, "as
the Courts refuse to make orders for ejectment, in spite of the
prevalence of such conditions.'' There is no doubt that the removal
of the Rent Restrictions Acts would, from some owners' point of
view, have been highly desirable; not for the reasons given, but
so that tenants who raised the slightest objection to the state of
their premises could be given notice to quit, for with a shortage of
houses such as existed at that time, new tenants willing to pay
exorbitant rents in exchange for any kind of housing could be easily
obtained. It is only necessary to consider what happened in this
particular case to realise the difficulties with which the inspectors
had to contend in order to maintain a considerable proportion of
the housing property in a sanitary condition, particularly when the
owners or agents were determined to do as little as could possibly
be done to "comply" with a Statutory Notice or a Magistrate's
Order, and were satisfied to be served with summons after summons
as regards their houses.
Nevertheless, the Public Health Department persisted in its
efforts to maintain a reasonable standard of housing accommodation
in the borough, and in later years the position showed considerable
improvement, although the difficult type of owner remained and
only the zeal of the department secured the necessary repairs, but
by 1938 it could justifiably be claimed that the persistent efforts
of the district inspectors had begun to take effect, for although
complaints in that year totalled 4,521, as a result of all forms of
inspections only 3,977 Intimation and 770 Statutory Notices were
necessary, whilst the number of summonses needed to enforce the
Notices was 22.
The great improvement secured was, however, not to be maintained
for very long, for the destruction of, and damage to, houses
which followed the air attacks soon found us in far worse a position
than had been experienced before and, as the bombing continued,
it seemed at one time that the position had become hopeless.