Press Release - 5 April 2004

While house prices continue to soar across the South East, the threat of Stansted Airport becoming bigger than Heathrow has dealt a £572 million blow to Uttlesford homeowners equivalent to an average of £28,000 per home according to a new report published this week by Stop Stansted Expansion (SSE).

The calculations have been derived from the official house price statistics maintained by the Land Registry Office - investigating the detailed records for Essex, Uttlesford and local postcode areas over the past two years.

The report has been prepared in response to BAA's proposed homeowner compensation scheme and has been sent to Transport Minister Tony McNulty, as well as to local MPs and MEPs and to county, district and parish councillors.

Although house prices in Uttlesford have increased overall since the airport expansion plans were announced in July 2002, this has been at less than half the rate compared with Essex as a whole where the increase has been over 25%.  This shortfall is equivalent to almost £28,000 for the average home.

The Land Registry statistics show that house prices in the north west part of Uttlesford (those with Cambridge postcodes) have generally not been significantly affected.  The main impacts, perhaps not surprisingly, are upon properties in postcode areas nearest to the airport and/or beneath flightpaths, with smaller properties generally less adversely affected than larger properties.

The increase in average house prices between July 2002 and December 2003 is as follows [see Note 1]:

CM 22 6 postcode area = +0.9% (Henham, Ugley, Elsenham, Takeley, Bamber's Green and Molehill Green)

CM 22 7 postcode area = +2.2% (Hatfield Heath, Hatfield Broad Oak, Little Hallingbury and Great Hallingbury)

CM 24 8 postcode area = -2.0% (Stansted Mountfitchet and Burton End)

CM6 1 postcode area = -3.2% (Barnston, the Rodings, the Canfields and part of Great Dunmow)

The other postcode areas which show the most significant impacts are CM6 2 (Thaxted, Broxted, Great Easton, Little Easton and Duton Hill) and CM6 3 (Felsted, Stebbing and part of Great Dunmow).

BAA has an obligation under the Government's Air Transport White Paper [see Note 2] to compensate homeowners for the impact of generalised blight on the property market but the airport operator is seeking to limit eligibility for compensation to just 500 homes in the immediate vicinity of the proposed second runway and intends to insist on a list of preconditions which could mean that the majority of applicants would not be able to qualify.  Examples are the need to prove a minimum 15% reduction in the value of the property and to demonstrate a “pressing reason to move” (with BAA excluding stress and anxiety as admissible medical reasons.)

“BAA's attempt to restrict eligibility for compensation to just 500 homes flies in the face of all the evidence” said Norman Mead, Chairman of Stop Stansted Expansion, who continued: “The official Land Registry statistics show that property values have been damaged over a far wider area than BAA is prepared to recognise.  The airport operator must accept its responsibilities and its clear obligation under the White Paper.  BAA must be told to deal with the situation fairly and properly.”

Stop Stansted Expansion estimates that at least 12,000 properties have been adversely affected and the number could be as high as 18,000 - 19,000, including some in East Herts.

“Whether or not the airport expansion plans ever materialise, the impact on local property prices is a present day reality simply because of the THREAT of massive airport expansion,” said Mr Mead, adding: “it's bad enough that BAA threatens to destroy so much of our local heritage and environment; local people should not also be expected to suffer financial loss on the value of their homes.   People who need to move home or want to move home should not be penalised through no fault of their own.”

Norman Mead concluded:  “BAA is using the White Paper as its mandate to bring forward its expansion plans.  Equally it should accept the obligations that the Government has placed upon it in the same document.  BAA cannot be allowed to 'dine a la carte' on the White Paper, choosing the bits that it likes and ignoring the bits that it doesn't.”

The HOSS cover letter and final report are on the SSE website at: www.stopstanstedexpansion.com/compensation.html

ENDS

NOTES FOR EDITORS

Note 1:  Ref: Table 2 of the SSE report.  The calculations are based on Land Registry quarterly statistics between April-June 2002 (i.e. the quarter immediately prior to publication of the airport expansion proposals) and October-December 2003 (latest available quarterly statistics).

Note 2:  The obligation placed upon BAA in the White Paper is as follows: “The airport operator will need to put in place a scheme to address the problem of generalised blight resulting from the runway proposal” - 'The Future of Air Transport White Paper' (Para 11.41).

FURTHER INFORMATION/COMMENT
Norman Mead, Chairman, SSE:  01279 659483 or at the Campaign Office on 01279 870558
Carol Barbone, Campaign Director, SSE:  0777 552 3091 or email cbarbone@mxc.co.uk