2660. 1. The fees of the Petitioner's surveyors be ordered to be a paid on quarterly basis by Crossrail.

  2661. 2. The valuation date for the valuation of the Petitioner's land be ordered to be either (a) the date of the Safeguarding Order in 1990 or (b) the date of the deposit of the Bill or (c) the date of acceptance of the Petitioner's blight notice.

  2662. 3. The land of the Petitioner be acquired at minimum estimate of value provided by Jones Lang LaSalle in their letter of 19 February 2008 on or before 4 April 2008.

  2663. 4. The Petitioner be granted a carried interest in the overstation development on a proportionate basis to his land in relation to the whole development less any sum paid in advance to the Petitioner in relation to the acquisition of the said land.

  2664. 5. Compensation be paid to the Petitioner for his time expended over 17 years as filed in his claim to Crossrail on 28 January 1997.

  2665. 6. Such other compensation be awarded as your Lordships in your absolute discretion shall deem fit.

  2666. CHAIRMAN: Can I ask you one question about this, Mr Saunderson, on your point 4, Crossrail almost certainly will not be carrying out the overstation development, at least I am right in saying that. I do not see how we can tell them that you are to have any particular part in it. Am I right in thinking that Crossrail are not likely to be carrying out the overstation development?

  2667. MS LIEVEN: My Lord, I was going to rise about paragraphs 4 and 5 here because they are not issues that the Petitioner has dealt with in the submissions he has made to your Lordships at all, therefore I have not dealt with them in response. Mr Smith can do so, if necessary. As far as overstation development is concerned, in all likelihood there will be an overstation development at Lindsey Street. The form of that overstation development falls outside the remit of the Bill or of this Committee. It will be taken forward in a normal planning application to the City Corporation. We have a policy on the circumstances in which owners of land which is acquired for the purposes of the Bill but then is available for overstation development have the right to buy back that land in particular circumstances. It is true to say that in a number of the central London sites we have entered into agreements with large property developers for them to take forward overstation development with us.

  2668. CHAIRMAN: It is not a Crichel Down principle?

  2669. MS LIEVEN: It is an expansion of the Crichel Down rules, my Lord, yes, precisely. Colin Smith can give evidence on the detail of that if necessary and that policy will be applied in respect of 10 Hayne Street to Mr Saunderson as it would to any other owner of land in that situation. I am not giving any guarantees as to whether or not Mr Saunderson would fall within the terms of that policy but it will be applied to him as it would be to anyone else.

  2670. CHAIRMAN: What do you want to say about 5?

  2671. MS LIEVEN: Yes, my Lord, I should say Mr Mould has reminded me that it is the land disposal policy and Mr Smith did refer to it—I had forgotten this—in the teach-in, so your Lordships could refer back to that if you want to know, and if I pick up a very large red file it is paper C 10 in the information papers. Five, my Lord, relates back to the issue of the other properties, the Long Lane properties where I did not refer to this because Mr Saunderson was, I thought, concerned that we did not, but where Mr Saunderson filed a claim to, I think, London Regional Transport in January 1997 in respect of compensation there is no statutory right to compensation in respect of those properties and that is the end of the matter. It would be quite wrong for the Committee to order compensation in respect of those properties or, indeed, to order compensation to be paid on 10 Hayne Street for time expanded over 17 years. There is simply no basis for such a claim.

  2672. CHAIRMAN: If there is anybody who is liable to pay it, it is not you?

  2673. MS LIEVEN: There is nobody, my Lord.

  2674. CHAIRMAN: It certainly is not Crossrail?

  2675. MS LIEVEN: It certainly is not the Secretary of State, the Promoter of this Bill, but I would not for one moment wish to go on the record as suggesting that Mr Saunderson should be pursuing a claim against somebody else because there is no statutory right to compensation in respect of those other properties or that time. My Lords, I think that deals, albeit briefly, with 4 and 5.

  2676. CHAIRMAN: Mr Saunderson, you have put us in a very difficult position, I am afraid. I perfectly well understand what it is you are saying but I think by this time you may also understand it is extremely difficult for us to do what it is that you want.

  2677. MR SAUNDERSON: Yes, I would like, if I may, to refer again to the undertakings that Ms Lieven gave to the House of Commons Select Committee and on the basis which the House of Commons Select Committee acted and I acted that they would purchase 10 Hayne Street now or within six months and they would pay the reasonable cost of the surveyors and lawyers of the process.

  2678. CHAIRMAN: Yes, but you do that by going to the Lands Tribunal. You have got all the necessary framework, the blight notice has been accepted, you can refer it to the Lands Tribunal any time you like.

  2679. MR SAUNDERSON: The timing was now, though, she gave the undertaking that the purchase was now, that was what the Commons accepted, not in 12 months or whenever a Lands Tribunal hearing happens, it was purchased now or within six months and she goes on to say, "I struggle to see what the problem is". She even emphasised what is Mr Saunderson's problem, he is going to get the money now or within six months, that is what we all understood perfectly clearly. She is attempting to explain that is not the case. We all heard it, we all understood what she was saying and we took it as an undertaking and paying reasonable surveyors' costs one takes as paying reasonable surveyors' costs which means paying them monthly or quarterly.

  2680. CHAIRMAN: No, it does not in these circumstances. Thank you very much. We must consider this. There is nothing else this afternoon. I think we had better discuss this amongst ourselves if you would be very kind and leave us in solitary confinement and turn off the microphones.