Maria Da Silva v London Borough of Brent

Compensation for compulsory acquisition must reflect losses that were reasonably incurred and are adequately justified. An acquiring authority’s earlier fee cap may be irrelevant where it has not enforced it and has instead undertaken to meet reasonable further costs.

Bare estimates, without records, invoices, explanation or direct evidence from the claimant, will not establish claims for personal time and incidental expenditure. Under the simplified procedure, however, the Tribunal may make a summary assessment of routine disturbance losses from limited evidence, using its specialist experience and any relevant concession by the acquiring authority.

The claimant’s leasehold flat was compulsorily acquired by the London Borough of Brent. Compensation for market value, home loss, and some fees and disturbance had already been paid or agreed.

The remaining reference concerned surveyor’s and legal fees, the claimant’s estimated time and expenses in finding replacement accommodation, and disturbance claims under section 5 rule 6 of the Land Compensation Act 1961. The claimant gave no witness statement or oral evidence. Her surveyor gave evidence and relied on estimates for several heads of loss.

The central issue was which of the claimed losses had been reasonably incurred and sufficiently evidenced to justify compensation.

1. The Tribunal awarded £26,930.50, plus VAT on £14,300 of surveyor’s fees. It disallowed the balance of the disputed claims except for specified disturbance items. It made no order for costs and held that statutory interest was payable from entry until payment.

2. The £2,000 cap on fees for finding alternative accommodation did not govern the disputed third surveyor’s invoice. The acquiring authority had not enforced that cap when paying earlier invoices and had later stated that it would meet reasonable further costs. The issue was therefore whether the claimed fees were reasonable amounts reasonably incurred.

3. The claimant’s circumstances and the acquiring authority’s changing approach justified substantial professional assistance. Nevertheless, the claim was not complex, the number of replacement properties inspected and accompanying travel were excessive, some work was duplicated, and the surveyor had not agreed an increase in his hourly rate. A summary assessment of £14,300 plus VAT was appropriate. The legal invoice was disallowed because it expressly concerned a challenge to the compulsory purchase order, rather than compensatable loss.

4. Following Thomas Newall Limited v Lancaster City Council [2013] JPL 1531, an individual may in principle be compensated for personal time reasonably spent on an acquisition. But the claimant had supplied only unexplained estimates and no direct evidence, records, receipts or invoices. No award was made for her time, travel or telephone costs.

5. The Tribunal could summarily assess routine losses for curtains and floor coverings under the simplified procedure, despite limited evidence, and awarded £1,500. It also allowed the mortgage broker’s fee, BT reconnection and bathroom handrails. It disallowed the unsupported satellite-dish and Sky reconnection claims.

6. Under Direction 12.8 of the Lands Chamber’s Practice Directions, neither party had acted unreasonably and no exceptional circumstance justified costs. Interest was payable under section 11 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965, at the prescribed rates under section 32 of the Land Compensation Act 1961.

• Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber): Compensation reference determined under the simplified procedure following compulsory acquisition of the claimant’s flat.
• Secretary of State: Confirmed the compulsory purchase order on 17 April 2008. The present judgment determined outstanding compensation and costs only.