society with which the policy was taken out. In this case he or she will get a new policy for a reduced amount or in the case of an endowment assurance policy modified in accordance with Regulations made by the Industrial Assurance Commissioner, so as to make up to the company or society for the loss it has suffered by the nonpayment of the arrears.

Where the person whose life is assured under a policy to which this notice applies has died or dies between August 4th, 1914, and March 7th, 1924, the person entitled to receive the sum payable under the policy, if it has not already been paid, may apply to the agent or to the head office of the company or society at any time before June 7th, 1925, and get the sum payable less the amount of arrears of premiums due at the date of the death.

If satisfaction has not been obtained after application both to the agent and to the head office, application may be made to the Industrial Assurance Commissioner, 17, North Audley Street, London, W.1.

A copy of this notice can be had upon application to any agent, or to the head office of the society or company concerned.

Approved.

G. STUART ROBERTSON, Industrial Assurance Commissioner.

One lot of these notices was advertised before August 1st, 1923, and this date was therefore taken as the date of publication and the commencement of the six months within which payment of arrears or application for a new policy had to be made.

The tear-off appended to the notice which was sent to each representative of each office was in the following form :

INDUSTRIAL ASSURANCE ACT, 1923.

Notice to Owners of Pre-War Policies protected by Courts (Emergency Powers) Act, 1914.

I hereby certify that I have received a copy of the above Notice as published in the Press, and I undertake to inform any policyholder making enquiry to whom the Notice applies of the facts and to supply him with a copy of the Notice.

Signature of Representative..

Holding the Position of....

District......

Date.......

The Regulations made by me in pursuance of sub-section (2) (b) for the purpose of determining the reduced amount or the manner of modification of the new policy to be issued to the holder of a

protected policy were the Industrial Assurance (Courts Emergency Powers) Regulations, 1923, dated July 17th, 1923 (S.R. & O. 1923, No. 810). These Regulations provided for the submission to the Commissioner by each office of a scheme for reduction or modification, within the limits fixed by the Regulations.

In practice it turned out that substantially the same model scheme was submitted by every office, any variations merely being due to the fact that the particular office did not happen to issue all the classes of assurance provided for by the model scheme.

VALUE OF POLICIES.

Section 29.

The Act does not lay down any tables of minimum free policies and surrender values, but indicates the basis on which they should be calculated by the offices.

While the principal purpose for which these calculations are required, namely the compulsory granting of free policies or surrender values under Section 24, will not be effective till June 7th, 1928, they are already needed for the purpose of arriving at the surrender value of an illegal or ultra vires policy under Section 5 or, much more frequently, for the purpose of the award of a surrender value, where the Commissioner is of opinion that the continued existence of the life assured is in doubt, under Section 32 (2).

Great assistance has been rendered to the Commissioner and to everyone who has to deal with these matters by the publication, on behalf of the Association of Industrial Assurance Companies and Collecting Friendly Societies and the Prudential Assurance Co., Ltd., of a book containing Tables of Free Policies and Other Functions, calculated in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The book can be obtained on application to Sir Thomas Neill, J.P., 29, Euston Square, London, N.W.1, at the price of 10s. 6d.

DISPUTES.
Section 32 (1).

During the year 237 disputes were referred to me. I heard and determined 114 of these, 88 were withdrawn or settled without award, and 35 stood over to 1925.

Most of these cases were heard in London, but I adopted, from the beginning, the practice of hearing cases locally where the circumstances required it. Sometimes the claimant or the office cannot do justice to the case unless the evidence is taken orally, but the amount at stake does not justify the bringing of several witnesses to London. Sometimes I have found it necessary, for my own satisfaction, to insist on seeing the witnesses before deciding a difficult question of fact.

In more than one case the claim was found, after the evidence had been taken locally, to rest on an entirely different basis from

that on which it had at first been supposed to rest, and occasionally the results were even more surprising. Thus in the case of Frederick Leach, reported in Appendix V, page 94, which I adjourned to Rochdale because I was not satisfied with the written depositions, the medical evidence of ill-health was found to relate not to the deceased but to another person of the same name who was present at the hearing in an apparently most robust condition.

The following local hearings were held during the year

At Hull, April 9 (6 cases), June 26 (5 cases), August 26 (4 cases); at Stalybridge, July 30 (2 cases); at Stockport, July 30 (2 cases); at Swansea, August 12 (1 case); at Birmingham, August 13 (1 case); at Fenny Stratford, October 1 (1 case); at Rochdale, October 24 (2 cases); at Bury, October 25 (1 case); at Glasgow, November 11 (5 cases); at Workington, November 12 (1 case): in all twelve visits to hear 31 cases. I am much indebted to the various local authorities for placing a court or room at my disposal.

It will be remembered that there are two limitations in the sub-section.

By one of these the amount of the claim which may be referred to the Commissioner is limited to £50. This is of little practical importance, as the amount assured by a single industrial policy rarely exceeds that amount.

By the other, he cannot hear a claim where the legality of the policy is questioned or where fraud or misrepresentation is alleged.

Thus matters are withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the Commissioner, which can be heard not only by county court judges and stipendiaries but also by lay magistrates, and the exploits of some of these tribunals in cases relating to assurance have been sufficiently odd to make one wonder why they should have been deemed more worthy than the Commissioner of settling this portion of them.

One absurd result of the limitation is that while the Commissioner is precluded from hearing cases where illegality, fraud or misrepresentation is alleged by the plaintiff, there is nothing to prevent his hearing cases where these matters are set up by the defendant, and he has in fact determined many of such cases. Fortunately, however, he can hear any sort of case by the consent of both parties, and such consent has been frequently given.

The sub-section for the first time gives those whose lack of means preclude them from resorting to a more expensive and formal tribunal the power to resort to an official who can deal with their complaints at no expense to them except a small fee, which they may recover if they are successful. The fee is imposed merely for the purpose of preventing frivolous claims.

Hitherto very few cases relating to industrial assurance have come before the courts and the law on the subject is very much

in need of judicial determination. I have therefore thought it well to furnish the Press with copies of those of my decisions which involved questions of law soon after they were delivered for the guidance of those engaged in the business, and propose to continue to do so.

All those decisions will be found in Appendix V to this Report, page 94, and in addition, some other decisions, which seem to be of general interest and therefore worthy of preservation.

It will be observed that most of these decisions deal with points of law on which there are no reported decisions, particularly those dealing with forfeiture notices.

The direct results of the sub-section may, I hope, be regarded as beneficial not only to the policy owner but also to the offices. The indirect results, I venture to think, have been not less, perhaps more, important.

In the first place, the nature and result of the cases which have come before me for decision seem to me to suggest that the existence of the sub-section, which gives easy recourse to the Commissioner, has led to a more sympathetic treatment of doubtful cases by the offices concerned, though I do not mean to suggest that such treatment has been generally unsympathetic in the past. Obviously it is not good business for an office to have discontented policy owners and claimants of benefits, and a well-conducted office deals as liberally with claims as it reasonably can. But now that the dissatisfied claimant can come to the Commissioner, clearly an additional incentive is provided for a proper settlement of claims if they can be settled.

I happened to see a circular issued by an important official to his subordinates, which contained the following words of wisdom :

"The ideal to be aimed at is that no case should ever go to the Commissioner in which investigation would disclose negligence, inefficient work or blameworthy conduct on the part of our representatives.

"All complaints therefore, even if apparently vexatious or trivial, should be patiently probed to the bottom, so that grievances may be removed and the Company's reputation for honest and straightforward dealing maintained and strengthened."

If this principle were invariably carried out, all legitimate claims would be satisfied, and the claims which came before the Commissioner would be only those which an office was legitimately entitled to contest on the facts or on the law or on both.

In the second place, the existence of the sub-section has made the Office of the Commissioner a sort of clearing-house for complaints of all sorts, and we have in very many cases been able to assist applicants to obtain what they were entitled to without recourse to the actual machinery of the sub-section. I am much indebted to the societies and companies for the courtesy with

which they have accepted such informal suggestions for the settlement of complaints as I have thought I could properly make.

The magnitude of this branch of the work is shewn by the fact that during the year no less than 2,186 complaints or applications were received by the Department and no less than 1,737 were disposed of without formal reference to the Commissioner.

APPLICATIONS IN CASES OF DOUBTFUL EXISTENCE.
Section 32 (2).

212 applications were made under this sub-section, of which 169 were dealt with by award, 19 were disposed of without award, and 24 stood over to 1925.

I hope the sub-section as it becomes more widely known will be utilised in a much greater number of cases. It presents a most convenient method by which owners of policies, where the life assured has disappeared, may be relieved of further payment and recover something at any rate of what they have paid, and offices may be able to clear their books of these tiresome cases with safety to themselves.

A considerable amount of use has already been made of this sub-section, but almost entirely by one office. I suggest that every office, which has a claim of this character, and does not feel able to discharge it without an award, or feels doubt whether the claim shall be met or not, should tell the applicant to apply to me without delay.

It must be remembered that the Commissioner cannot presume death and award the full sum assured under the subsection. He can merely decide on the evidence that the existence of the life assured is doubtful and order payment of the surrender value to the person entitled.

It follows that the evidence required to establish that the existence of the life assured is doubtful need not be nearly as strong as that which would be required to enable death to be presumed.

In some exceptional cases, however, where it was pretty certain that the life assured was dead or, as one of our applicants put it "I have my opinion that he will have died somewhere without informing any of us," though there was no definite evidence of the death, the office concerned has consented to an award of the full sum assured under the guise of surrender value. In other such cases, I have advised the applicant to agree to an adjournment of the application where there is hope that evidence of death might be procured and so the whole sum assured might become payable, with liberty to restore it for hearing, if

necessary.

Only one case under this sub-section has involved a point of law of sufficient importance to be reported. The report of the case in question will be found in Appendix V, page 115, under the heading Surrender Value."