Where the value of an interest in land is depreciated by physical factors caused by public works, the landowner is entitled to compensation under Part 1 of the Land Compensation Act 1973.
The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) has considered an application for compensation by a single claimant in Fisk v Suffolk County Council [2023] UKUT 214 (LC).
The claim concerned a 40-metre spur of new road constructed to give access to a development of 280 houses on the edge of Brantham in Suffolk, due to complete in 2027. The claimant sought compensation for the impact on his property – a detached three-bedroom brick house on an estate built in the mid-1990s – of the road, which was 22 metres from the rear façade of his property and two metres higher than his back garden to overcome drainage problems.
The letter of claim identified all-night lighting to the rear of the house and garden from the road lighting and daytime noise since the construction commenced, which would only increase once the road was open to residents. In late 2021, acoustic fencing was erected on the side of the road nearest the property and the heads on street lamps lining the road were changed to allow them to be dimmed. Part-night lighting – whereby the lights are turned off between 11.30pm and 6am – was also adopted.
The 1973 Act allows a landowner to claim compensation for noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke and artificial lighting and discharge of any solid or liquid substance onto its land caused by public works. The compensation payable is assessed under section 5 of the Land Compensation Act 1961 by comparing the “switched on” value – the market value of the property subject to the physical factors – and its hypothetical market value assuming those factors are “switched off”. The agreed valuation date was 1 September 2021, before the respondent’s remedial works.
The claimant sought compensation of £35,000, relying on an estate agent’s letter of appraisal of his property attracting offers of £375,000 but rising to £410,000 if it still backed on to open land. The respondent’s expert assessed those values as £398,000 and £400,000, resulting in a claim of £2,000. The tribunal, having reviewed the comparables, decided that a purchaser at the valuation date would have expected a switch to part-night lighting but not the installation of the acoustic fencing. They would have discounted their bid for the property in a round sum of £10,000, 2.5% of the “switched off” value of £400,000. This was the compensation payable to the claimant.
Louise Clark is a property law consultant and mediator
