§ 7.52 p.m.
§ Report received.
§ Clause 1 [Rights of second-named joint shareholders]:
§ Lord Inglewoodmoved Amendment No. 1:
§ Page 2, line 13, at end insert—
("() If a person dies during the requisite period at a time when he is named in the records of the society as a joint holder of any shares jointly held, this section shall have effect in relation to any later time as if he had never been so named.")
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, as my noble friend Lord Henley explained at Committee stage, the Bill has the full support of the Government. The Government proposed a number of amendments at that stage which were designed to ensure that the Bill achieved the stated aims of my noble friend Lord Hayhoe, and the honourable Member for Gloucester who launched the Bill in another place. The amendments, which were supported on all sides of your Lordships' House, would allow second-named or former second-named holders to benefit following the death of a first-named holder, on the creation of a joint account, the division of a joint account, or when there has been a change in the order of names within the account.
§ As my noble friend made clear at Committee stage, it is not the intention of the measures to enable individuals to claim two distributions by manipulating their accounts by, for example, splitting them up. The Government looked carefully at the wording of the Bill since Committee stage and considered whether further amendments could be made that would allow other categories of investor to benefit without jeopardising the subsequent passage of the Bill. In particular, we sought to take account of the views expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Eatwell.
§ I am pleased to say that the Government propose one further amendment to address the case for a multiple account with, for example, a mother, father and son where both parents die. We intend to insert a new subsection into the proposed new Section 102A of the Building Societies Act 1986, which was approved by your Lordships' House at Committee stage. It will be inserted after the current subsection (3). The amendment 1692 has the effect that, where an account holder dies, the subsequent account holder moves up the scale. The amendment does not deal with the position of third and subsequent named account holders in situations other than death as to do so would make the Bill much more complex, particularly the provisions in regard to priority. However, it would address the case that the noble Lord raised in Committee; that is, where both parents die it would allow the son to qualify for distribution. I beg to move.
§ Lord Eatwell
My Lords, I am delighted that the Government have been able to take account of one of the remaining anomalies which I detected at Committee stage. It would be churlish of me to ask about some of the other anomalies or spend time searching for others. I am therefore delighted to support the amendment.
On Question, amendment agreed to.