FAMILY HOMES

Wanganui Chronicle, 8 November 1946, Page 7

FAMILY HOMES

Sir,—Reference to the Family Protection Act, 1.908, will contradict Mr. O Dea’s claim, made in his address at Hawera on Friday night that the National Party's scheme for joint tenure of homes by husband and wife has ai--eady been on the Statute Book for many years. It is true that under that Act a family home may be registered, but subject to such severe restrictions as to render the enactment the dead letter it has always been. In the first place, under the Act the land must he unencumbered, i.e., free of mortgage, before it can be registered as a family home. This would rule out the majority of houses in New Zealand. Further, the value of the land and improvements must not exceed £l5OO, and any creditor of the settlor may caveat the transaction within twelve months. Secondly, the home imay not be sold, mo.tgaged or otherwise dealt with until either the death of the settlor or the time when all his children have attained 21 years of age, whichever date is the later. As there is no provision in the Act for deregistration, this would mean that anyone having to change his residence or move to another town would not be able to get rid of the family home or mortgage it to help him buy a new one. If the settlor left young children, the whole property would be tied up until the youngest child reached 21. Then there are severe restrictions on how the settlor may leave it by will. He may only leave it to members of his family, or if he has no family, then amongst those who would be entitled in case of his intestacy. These are the broad restrictions which make the Act, as it stands, impracticable. The National Party's scheme, which appeals as eminently just, is, as I understand it, simply this—that a home may be tegistered in the joint names of husband and wife, and will go to the survivor without payment of death duties. This entails no restrictions as to dealing with the property by way of sale or mortgage, and applies to to homes of any value and whether mortgaged or not—a vastly different matter from the present Act. No wonder no one has ever used it!—l am, etc., CIVIS. Hawera, Nov. 6, 1946.