950 homeowners seeking compensation from Southend Airport (From Southend Standard)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting ECHONEWS to 80360, or email us Click here for details »
950 homeowners seeking compensation from Southend Airport
12:10pm Thursday 21st March 2013 in Echo News By David Trayner
SAEN members Bill Robinson and Graham Whitehead, who are both making claims
ALMOST 1,000 homeowners have submitted compensation claims to Southend Airport for a loss of value to their homes – with hundreds more expected.
Surveyors submitted at least 950 claims from people who believe the extension of the airport’s runway has cut their house price in the first week since applications opened.
Chartered surveyor Michael Marriott, who submitted more than 650 claims on Monday and is preparing to hand in about 50 more, said: “It’s quite evident that there is a significant number of people who are feeling aggrieved enough to make a claim.
“There are clearly more than 700 people who have concerns about it.
“Our experience of this is that it will continue because neighbours speak to one another.”
The airport has to compensate householders who can prove an increase in noise, vibration, dust, smell, light pollution, discharge or fumes as a result of the airport’s expansion has devalued their homes, under a law called the Land Compensation Act.
Applications opened on March 9, the day after the anniversary of the runway extension opening.
Comments(74)
Nebs
says...
12:41pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Howard Chase wrote:I doubt it, in much the same way that if someone drove into your car and made a small dent in the door you would be compensated at the time rather than having to wait until you decided to sell your car.
are they all planning to sell their houses then?
Nebs
says...
12:41pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Howard Chase wrote:I doubt it, in much the same way that if someone drove into your car and made a small dent in the door you would be compensated at the time rather than having to wait until you decided to sell your car.
are they all planning to sell their houses then?
lennyfy
says...
12:42pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Joe Wildman-Clark
says...
12:43pm Thu 21 Mar 13
uncle_jarvis
says...
12:45pm Thu 21 Mar 13
world_gone_wrong
says...
12:47pm Thu 21 Mar 13
pembury53
says...
12:50pm Thu 21 Mar 13
lennyfy wrote:But you cannot be certain that house prices have not been devalued, in which case they are entitled to compensation. People out to make a fast buck with presumably no chance of success, will i imagine, face legal costs.
One surveyor submitting 650 claims ! if thats not evidence of people just out to make a fast buck i dont know what is. There is more noise from people mowing or strimming their gardens all day long than you get from the 30 seconds it takes an aircraft to pass. These applications should go straight in the bin where they belong.
Biker One
says...
12:51pm Thu 21 Mar 13
jayman
says...
12:53pm Thu 21 Mar 13
CaptainBlackadder
says...
1:05pm Thu 21 Mar 13
paintlad3
says...
1:06pm Thu 21 Mar 13
autopilot
says...
1:08pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Doubt it.
Biker One
says...
1:18pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Letmetryagain
says...
1:22pm Thu 21 Mar 13
pembury53
says...
1:27pm Thu 21 Mar 13
autopilot wrote:Where, in any walk of life, would that make any sense ? Its not complicated. If they have suffered consequential loss, then they are entitled to compenstation. The airport wasn't redeveloped out of a charitable desire to provide cheap flights to malaga, it was done so that the owners could make a stack of money..... which is fine, so long as all the potential costs are factored in... one of them being compensation for other peoples loss.
So, if their houses are re-valued but actually had gone up in price due to the close proximity of the Airport, will they hand this over to Stobarts? Doubt it.
emcee
says...
1:41pm Thu 21 Mar 13
-
Erm, no, they are all jumping on the "try and get some free money" bandwagon.
Hardly any of them, if any, will get any compensation. Even if they do it will hardly be anything of significance. How many of them are going to be able to prove an "increase in noise, vibration, dust, smell, light pollution, discharge or fumes", especially when the airport has been there for many many years (a lot of them years with noisier and more polluting aircraft than the current, modern batch), more years than most "claimants" have lived anywhere near the airport?
If someone knocked on your door, and asked if you want free money, just to fill out this claim form, 99% would do it. It is more or less exactly the same that has happened here.
This country has gone compensation mad. But, hey, if you next door neighbour is claiming, nothing lost in claiming yourself...
I hope the outcome really shows what it is... an opportunists fiasco. Let's hope good sense will prevail.
Soouthchurch59
says...
1:41pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Or maybe not....
waveydavey
says...
1:46pm Thu 21 Mar 13
What a load of tosh. Just look at the photo to determine what sort of people we´re talking about here.
notinwestcliffanymore
says...
1:54pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Democrat
says...
1:55pm Thu 21 Mar 13
The airport was officially opened as a municipal airport on 18 September 1935. So unless they bought their houses before 1935 they must have known that there was an airport, and regardless of any improvement, what did they expect. Was it a shock that planes fly out of an airport?
billericay boy
says...
1:57pm Thu 21 Mar 13
drofmor1
says...
2:28pm Thu 21 Mar 13
southendshrimper
says...
2:35pm Thu 21 Mar 13
drofmor1
says...
2:38pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Noteworthy
says...
2:41pm Thu 21 Mar 13
How about - if they win (and I doubt it), the difference in value before and after is paid to them once they sell their property. If their home was worth £200,000, and it's only worth £190,000 now, why should they get a free £10k?
Does the value of a property matter until it is sold?
And while I'm on this rant - property prices have fallen and gone up for years - I might sue the government next time the value of my property falls due to the economy!
Carnabackable
says...
2:46pm Thu 21 Mar 13
The court costs against them, far out weighed their compensation claim.......
Ed in
says...
2:49pm Thu 21 Mar 13
uncle_jarvis wrote:Thinking of all that lovely money I guess..
They seem happy enough in the photo.
Englishman67
says...
2:51pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Carnabackable
says...
3:05pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Sean4u
says...
3:18pm Thu 21 Mar 13
:strokes chin:
uncle_jarvis
says...
3:38pm Thu 21 Mar 13
That doesn't mean I think they are entitled to, or will get, any compensation. Lots of people are just chancing their luck as they don't have anything to lose.
Ray1963
says...
4:27pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Nebs
says...
5:42pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Hopefully the lawyers will be on the ball, and include a clause that additional compensation will be payable if passenger numbers ever go over the predicted 2m a year, or if the quota for flights is ever increased.
Will_s1986
says...
5:42pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Nebs
says...
5:55pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Will_s1986 wrote:If you buy an airport, and plan to expand it, then you plan for compensation payments as part of that plan. If you don't want to pay then don't buy an airport.
You buy or rent a house buy an airport what do you expect?!? Kittens!! Don't like it MOVE... Simples
Joe Wildman-Clark
says...
6:47pm Thu 21 Mar 13
I also hear a member of a protest group the protest group who were not anti-airport but anti-expansion actually wished for Stobarts to go bust and every single worker with the company loosing their jobs!
So the mask of the group has slipped and the true face has been seen one that IS anti-airport and their real goal is to see the airport closed with 1000+ jobs lost with in the Southend area.
Ray1963
says...
7:26pm Thu 21 Mar 13
max zorin
says...
8:08pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Eric62
says...
8:16pm Thu 21 Mar 13
After the council gave planning permission to extend the runway we now are forced to put up with these orange tin cans flying over.
tophatdt
says...
8:44pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Joe Wildman-Clark
says...
8:48pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Eric62 wrote:and anyone living there in the 50's,60's and early 70's would remember just how much LOUDER the aircraft were then to now, they would remember the oil dripping Carvair's and the other piston aircraft that could be heard from miles away they were far far far louder and dirtier than the A319;s of today and if you deny that than you never lived back then.
Anyone with a property in Leigh would have experience no nuisance from the airport in the last 20 years, except for a transporter plane late at night and a few light aircraft.
After the council gave planning permission to extend the runway we now are forced to put up with these orange tin cans flying over.
Walt Jabsco
says...
8:59pm Thu 21 Mar 13
DogsMessInLeigh
says...
9:05pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Eric62 wrote:be honest now,they are no real problem....the bloke that cruises up and down London road in the old blue BMW Coupe makes more noise with his Muzak cranked up full throttle.
Anyone with a property in Leigh would have experience no nuisance from the airport in the last 20 years, except for a transporter plane late at night and a few light aircraft.
After the council gave planning permission to extend the runway we now are forced to put up with these orange tin cans flying over.
DogsMessInLeigh
says...
9:07pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Devils Advocate
says...
10:33pm Thu 21 Mar 13
If I claim compo for that...... this time next year Rodderney.....
oslo m
says...
6:57am Fri 22 Mar 13
Jilly from Leigh
says...
7:56am Fri 22 Mar 13
2shedsjackson
says...
8:15am Fri 22 Mar 13
.
After all the Royal Flying Corp set up a fighter station at Rochford with 198 & 61 Squadrons in 1914. They were mainly flying night ops to protect the locals against Hun Gotha and Zeppelin bombers.
.
Then again in 1939 a similar event occurred this time involving No 11 group comprising of amongst others 74,616,603,611,19,40
3,350,234,222 and 349 squadrons. Our Brave Boys (That I mean most sincerely) flew day and night to protect the locals.
.
So I reckon the RAF, who are short of the readies at the moment, can put together a pretty hefty claim against this residents group. However, if you acquired your property after 1945 why are you claiming compo for something that has been there for about 99 years !!!
.
It's a bit like buying a house next to a church and then moaning because the bell ringers are more active then when you first moved in.
davek 1
says...
8:57am Fri 22 Mar 13
Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:Or, even worse, a heavily loaded Channel Airways Viscount screaming past, barely clearing rooftops!!
Eric62 wrote:and anyone living there in the 50's,60's and early 70's would remember just how much LOUDER the aircraft were then to now, they would remember the oil dripping Carvair's and the other piston aircraft that could be heard from miles away they were far far far louder and dirtier than the A319;s of today and if you deny that than you never lived back then.
Anyone with a property in Leigh would have experience no nuisance from the airport in the last 20 years, except for a transporter plane late at night and a few light aircraft.
After the council gave planning permission to extend the runway we now are forced to put up with these orange tin cans flying over.
saltydawg
says...
9:16am Fri 22 Mar 13
tophatdt
says...
12:42pm Fri 22 Mar 13
stopmoaning1
says...
1:17pm Fri 22 Mar 13
And how will it work. If proved, would they the difference now or when they sell. If they got it now and sold 5 years down the line, surely the margins would have increased further.
I’m in Leigh, not quite directly under the flight path and two houses in my road sold a while ago for the full asking price within a week. And before any one asks, the asking price was in line with the regional price increases.
They could also be scoring an own goal here as well. If you have reported your neighbours for being noisy or inconsiderate, you have to by law mention this to prospective buyers. Would you have to do the same if you have won a compensation award against the airport? Not a good selling point in my view.
Rouge9
says...
5:26pm Fri 22 Mar 13
tophatdt wrote:That is a relatively low aircraft, 1500 feet. Probably a small lens (55mm tops)
What a posey caption photo! Is that an overflight into Gatwick we see in the photo, or is it actually taking off from Southend. Low and noisy? I dont think so. The Echo photographer must have fallen asleep waiting for that shot!! Idiots.
Rouge9
says...
5:28pm Fri 22 Mar 13
Joe Wildman-Clark
says...
7:21pm Fri 22 Mar 13
ORACUS
says...
7:33pm Fri 22 Mar 13
Rouge9 wrote:Compensation = anti airport?
should add, that those who register for compensation should have to register their passport number, that way as they actively oppose the airport, they should be forbidden from ever using it
That's just dumb.
disenfranchisedpast
says...
8:04pm Fri 22 Mar 13
ORACUS wrote:Well the compensation drive has been whipped up by the anti-airport organisation SAEN so its not that much of a stretch
Rouge9 wrote:Compensation = anti airport?
should add, that those who register for compensation should have to register their passport number, that way as they actively oppose the airport, they should be forbidden from ever using it
That's just dumb.
ORACUS
says...
10:59am Sat 23 Mar 13
disenfranchisedpast wrote:Just like people who supported Southend airport expansion are anti air travel.
ORACUS wrote:Well the compensation drive has been whipped up by the anti-airport organisation SAEN so its not that much of a stretch
Rouge9 wrote:Compensation = anti airport?
should add, that those who register for compensation should have to register their passport number, that way as they actively oppose the airport, they should be forbidden from ever using it
That's just dumb.
Their not because 99% are not clever enough to work that out.
stopmoaning1
says...
6:13pm Sat 23 Mar 13
ORACUS wrote:And you’re not clever enough to work out you should have used ‘They’re’ and not ‘Their’
disenfranchisedpast wrote:Just like people who supported Southend airport expansion are anti air travel.
ORACUS wrote:Well the compensation drive has been whipped up by the anti-airport organisation SAEN so its not that much of a stretch
Rouge9 wrote:Compensation = anti airport?
should add, that those who register for compensation should have to register their passport number, that way as they actively oppose the airport, they should be forbidden from ever using it
That's just dumb.
Their not because 99% are not clever enough to work that out.
Thomo100
says...
9:01pm Sat 23 Mar 13
pembury53 wrote:They have not suffered any loss and may never suffer any loss so isn't all a little crazy.
autopilot wrote:Where, in any walk of life, would that make any sense ? Its not complicated. If they have suffered consequential loss, then they are entitled to compenstation. The airport wasn't redeveloped out of a charitable desire to provide cheap flights to malaga, it was done so that the owners could make a stack of money..... which is fine, so long as all the potential costs are factored in... one of them being compensation for other peoples loss.
So, if their houses are re-valued but actually had gone up in price due to the close proximity of the Airport, will they hand this over to Stobarts? Doubt it.
Surely any compensation should only be paid if loss actually happens?
House prices 'may' be deemed to have gone down but they can also go up if we are using this theory of 'potential'.
Thinking of all the jobs and wealth the expansion has given to the local area needs to be understood.
Thomo100
says...
9:07pm Sat 23 Mar 13
If any of them watched comic relief last week they should have a long, hard look at themselves and think "things are prety much OK in my life really".
Picture of usual, stereotypical busy bodies with nothing better to do.
You never see 30-40 year old working people in these type,of situations, do you?
ORACUS
says...
11:08am Sun 24 Mar 13
stopmoaning1 wrote:Only you would get english a maths mixed up.
ORACUS wrote:And you’re not clever enough to work out you should have used ‘They’re’ and not ‘Their’
disenfranchisedpast wrote:Just like people who supported Southend airport expansion are anti air travel.
ORACUS wrote:Well the compensation drive has been whipped up by the anti-airport organisation SAEN so its not that much of a stretch
Rouge9 wrote:Compensation = anti airport?
should add, that those who register for compensation should have to register their passport number, that way as they actively oppose the airport, they should be forbidden from ever using it
That's just dumb.
Their not because 99% are not clever enough to work that out.
kitson
says...
4:02pm Sun 24 Mar 13
Lives far from the airport near the bottom of westcliff schools so if the claim is successful then surely thousands of homes can claim as well. I hope they dont get a penny.
jolllyboy
says...
5:15pm Sun 24 Mar 13
Hugh.Janus
says...
7:13pm Sun 24 Mar 13
House pricing is a subjective matter; the property is only worth what anyone is prepared to pay for it and that will only be known when the property is sold.
So are all these money grabbers going to move immediately? Because that is the only way they will know if their house price has altered. It must be remembered also that the only reason that all of this came about is because of greedy solicitors/lawyers canvassing for business, bit like ambulance chasers.
I also live under the flight path and frequently see easy jet planes in their approach and take off, it takes around 10 to 15 seconds from when one first hears them and it disappears, I hear more noise from the ambient noise in the street and the engine noises of the cars and motor bikes, especially the latter.
Is this what we are coming to, what a shame!
Devils Advocate
says...
11:14pm Sun 24 Mar 13
jolllyboy wrote:I think this is what happens when you live near an airport. I know of no "London Airport" that does not have houses under its flight path. Maybe you have never flown in an aeroplane. If you have, then you too are a supporter of Aircraft noise. You think you are entitled to compensation?
Unless you live with the noise you have no idea of how intrusive it is. When you have to not talk in your own garden when the planes go over it is just too much. We did NOT have it like this in the 60s and 70s ! The airport have been disingenuous with the amount of noise we were told we would have and do have and so they must pay up - or better still close. The noise can vary between houses in the same road that's how much it varies so it is no good someone at the end of my road saying they dont hear it because I do !
The people who have opposed larger aircraft flying out of Southend have had lots of years when decisions went their way. I think that the post following yours is more relevant. The younger generation that drive cars with "Bean can" exhausts create far more noise than the aircraft, they are breaking the law, they are doing it in anti-social hours, when it should be quiet to allow working people to sleep, but you are complaining about something that most people knew was inevitable. Look around you. Most working people now have problems in their environment. You live near an airport. Big deal. Think of people whose homes are within range of the M25 or like me, who live on the route of the drunken exodus from Bas Vegas! I'll swap with you any day!
siddymint
says...
8:39am Mon 25 Mar 13
he was going to engage L15 a german airshift that had come to a halt damged over what is now the elms .
The residents were frightend but I assumed that they must had filled in compenstion cliams .
oh he didn't engage the airship as he relised his mum and dad lived below in Station road
r6keith
says...
12:34pm Mon 25 Mar 13
pembury53 wrote:In the same way if these houses existed during the airports last busy noisey phase during the 60's along the same line of thought they would have been cheaper,but as the airport became quiter for a decade the prices might have rissen, all that is happening now ( if they really are devalued any more than anywhere else in the country,which I do not think they are) is finding that level again . If you purchased during the quite period and did not do a proper survey on the area a purchased not know about the airport or thought its quite but decided to buy anyway ! the blame lays at your own feet no one elses.
lennyfy wrote: One surveyor submitting 650 claims ! if thats not evidence of people just out to make a fast buck i dont know what is. There is more noise from people mowing or strimming their gardens all day long than you get from the 30 seconds it takes an aircraft to pass. These applications should go straight in the bin where they belong.But you cannot be certain that house prices have not been devalued, in which case they are entitled to compensation. People out to make a fast buck with presumably no chance of success, will i imagine, face legal costs.
whataday
says...
2:02pm Mon 25 Mar 13
smiffy1980
says...
3:08pm Mon 25 Mar 13
Although the airport was there first, I did not expect planes to take off and land there. How dare they..........Gimmie the money lol.
EastStBoy
says...
1:37pm Wed 27 Mar 13
I hate the obsessive easy money-grabbing culture that is rife in this country.
WestcliffWarrior
says...
9:18pm Wed 3 Apr 13
WestcliffWarrior
says...
9:20pm Wed 3 Apr 13
Howard Chase says...
12:23pm Thu 21 Mar 13