The prospect of a third runway at Heathrow Airport has resurfaced repeatedly over the past decade. For communities across West London and the Thames Valley, this is not only national infrastructure policy but day-to-day uncertainty about homes, values and the ability to plan ahead. This guide explains how the compensation framework operates, where it falls short, and why reform is needed.
Background and current position
Parliament designated the Airports National Policy Statement (“ANPS”) in June 2018, naming a north-west runway as the preferred option, and the Supreme Court confirmed in December 2020 that the framework remains lawful. Government confirmed political support in January 2025 and, in November 2025, selected Heathrow Airport Limited (“HAL”) north-west runway scheme as the basis for reviewing the ANPS. On 18 June 2026, the Department for Transport launched a consultation on the draft Heathrow Expansion National Policy Statement (“HENPS”), running until 1 September 2026, with a planning decision targeted for 2029.
Policy support is not consent to build, nor does it trigger compensation. Heathrow must still obtain a Development Consent Order, complete airspace redesign through the CAA’s CAP1616 process, and overcome environmental, financial and legal challenges, including compliance with carbon budgets, air quality limits and surface access requirements, all likely to face legal and regulatory challenge. A new runway remains many years from operation.
Why timing matters for homeowners
This matters because property markets react long before construction begins. Perceived risk of compulsory purchase, future noise or loss of amenity can depress prices, yet the law draws a sharp line between compensation available before construction and only once a runway is operational.
The 2026 consultation: what it does and does not decide
The 2026 consultation follows HAL’s November 2025 selection for a 3,500-metre north-west runway, moving part of the M25 into a tunnel, costing around £33 billion within a wider £49 billion programme. It sets four tests: a credible economic strategy; compatibility with climate targets; no breach of air quality limits; and no worsening of noise against a 2024 baseline. The Climate Change Committee will advise on net zero alignment.
Separately, the CAA approved HAL recovering up to £320 million of early planning costs from 2025-26 through higher airport charges. This funds preparatory work; it is not permission for the runway itself.
The consultation does not grant development consent and is not a blight or compensation mechanism. Government expects the final ANPS to reach a parliamentary vote in autumn 2026, a planning decision by 2029, and operation not before the mid-2030s. These steps could still be delayed or reshaped.
The Land Compensation Act 1973: compensation after a runway opens
For most residents affected by noise or overflight, the main route to compensation is Part I of the Land Compensation Act 1973, applying once new public works are built and used. It allows claims for reduction in market value caused by physical factors, including noise, vibration, lighting and fumes; only loss attributable to those factors is compensable.
Compensation is retrospective: loss is calculated based on values 1 year after the third runway is operational. Claims generally cannot be made until then. It does not cover construction disturbance, anxiety, stigma, or difficulty selling before operation begins, nor altered flight paths alone; loss must flow from the runway’s physical effects.
In practice, Part I claims relating to airports are frequently contested, particularly on causation, baseline noise levels and valuation, making early specialist advice important. For residents who sell before a runway opens, any reduction in value linked to anticipated noise is not recoverable under Part I.
Living with uncertainty: blight before construction
The period between policy approval and operation is often hardest for affected communities: uncertainty alone can affect values and the ability to move. Although commonly described as “blight”, legal protection at this stage is limited.
Statutory blight under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 lets certain owners require a public authority or statutory undertaker (a status HAL holds) to buy their property at unaffected market value, where a qualifying proposal exists, the claimant holds a qualifying interest, and efforts to sell have failed because of the proposal.
There must be a qualifying planning proposal in place, such as land safeguarded for compulsory acquisition or identified in a development plan or confirmed Development Consent Order. The claimant must hold a qualifying interest, usually a freehold or long lease of a dwelling, and must show that reasonable efforts to sell on the open market have failed because of the proposal.
Statutory blight is most relevant to properties identified for acquisition or affected by safeguarded access works; it does not generally assist residents whose concerns are future noise, flight paths or amenity, even where these affect value. Notices are frequently disputed and may go to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), a slow and technical process.
Heathrow’s discretionary property schemes
Alongside the statutory framework, Heathrow runs discretionary schemes for homeowners needing to sell before construction but outside statutory blight, chiefly the Interim Property Hardship Scheme, purchasing on compelling personal circumstances and inability to sell. Heathrow has also run voluntary purchase schemes in defined zones.
These schemes can offer real relief but are not legal entitlements: eligibility and geographic coverage are set by Heathrow, have changed over time, and are not guaranteed to continue. Decisions are discretionary, and a refusal does not create a statutory blight right or route to compensation.
The gap in protection
These regimes leave a clear gap: Part I compensation only arises once operational, statutory blight assists a narrow class tied to land acquisition, and discretionary schemes fill some of the space between, unevenly and without legal certainty.
Airspace redesign may extend noise well beyond communities historically associated with Heathrow, raising questions of causation: whether increased noise is attributable to the new runway, wider airspace modernisation, or background activity. These issues will be central to future Part I claims and require careful technical evidence.
This means prolonged uncertainty and potential loss of value with no guaranteed compensation for years: selling early crystallises losses that cannot be recovered, while remaining may mean living with reduced market confidence indefinitely.
The case for reform
Similar issues arise with major road, rail and energy infrastructure projects, where communities may live for years with uncertainty before statutory compensation rights arise. Heathrow expansion highlights a broader mismatch between modern infrastructure timescales and a compensation framework rooted in 1970s legislation, increasingly relevant to public confidence in nationally significant infrastructure projects.
If major infrastructure projects take decades from approval to operation, the law should better address the human and financial cost of delay. Earlier statutory triggers, clearer national standards for discretionary schemes, and greater transparency around flight path design would ease the burden communities carry alone.
The current HENPS consultation is a live opportunity to press these points. Although its four tests focus on economic, climate, air quality and noise outcomes, residents and their advisers can use it to raise concerns about the adequacy of compensation and blight arrangements before the policy statement is finalised.
What residents can do now
Residents potentially affected should seek early advice and establish whether their property falls within safeguarded or discretionary scheme areas. Careful record-keeping, including valuation and marketing history, may prove critical to any future claim. Residents should also consider responding to the consultation before 1 September 2026 and watch for the parliamentary vote in autumn 2026.
The debate over a third runway is often framed around connectivity and growth, but for residents it is also about fairness, certainty and protecting homes. With the consultation open until 1 September 2026 and a parliamentary vote expected in autumn 2026, this has moved into a live, time-limited process. Understanding the compensation framework, and where it falls short, is the first step to ensuring those most affected are not left without redress.
