Closed consultation

Compulsory Purchase Process and Compensation Reforms

Published 19 December 2024

Applies to England and Wales

Scope of the consultation

Topic of this consultation

This consultation seeks views on reforming the compulsory purchase process and compensation rules.

Scope of this consultation

This consultation seeks views on a range of proposals aimed at implementing technical reforms to the compulsory purchase process to make it cheaper, quicker and fairer.

Geographical scope

These proposals relate to England and Wales.

Basic information

Body responsible for the consultation

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.

Duration

This consultation will begin on 19 December 2024 and close at 11.59pm on 13 February 2025.

Enquiries:

For any enquiries about the consultation please contact: CompulsoryPurchaseConsultation@communities.gov.uk

How to respond

You may respond by completing an online survey at: https://consult.communities.gov.uk/planning/consultation-compulsory-purchase-reforms

Alternatively, you can email your response to the questions in this consultation to: CompulsoryPurchaseConsultation@communities.gov.uk

If you are responding in writing, please make it clear which questions you are responding to.

Written responses should be sent to:

Compulsory Purchase Consultation Team
Planning – Development Management Division
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Floor 3, Fry Building
2 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DF

When you reply it would be very useful if you confirm whether you are replying as an individual or submitting an official response on behalf of an organisation and include:

• your name
• your position (if applicable)
• the name of organisation (if applicable)
• an address (including post-code)
• an email address
• a contact telephone number

1. Introduction

1. Compulsory purchase is the power to acquire land and property without the consent of the owner. It is an important land assembly tool needed to help deliver social, environmental and economic change in the public interest.

2. The Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 (“LURA”) introduced reforms to the compulsory purchase order (“CPO”) process to make it easier to use. It also made changes to the compensation regime to ensure the balance of compensation and costs associated with the prospects of planning permission for appropriate alternative development is correct and more akin to normal market conditions.

3. The LURA also introduced a power to allow for the removal of value associated with the prospect of planning permission (i.e. “hope value”) from the assessment of compensation in certain circumstances. The power allows acquiring authorities such as local authorities (including Mayoral combined authorities), Homes England, NHS Bodies, development corporations, to include in CPOs directions to remove the payment of hope value from compensation providing it is in the public interest. Directions may be sought for CPOs on schemes providing public benefits, such as development which includes provision of affordable or social housing (which doesn’t have to be 100% provision), new schools, or new hospitals. We believe it is right to provide a way to remove hope value from the assessment of compensation when schemes are delivering benefits for communities which are in the public interest.

4. The use of directions will be most beneficial when upfront certainty on how much a CPO will cost is needed to ensure the scheme underlying the CPO and the associated benefits can be delivered. The use of directions will also help avoid long disputes with landowners over the amount of compensation payable and eradicate the uncertainty, delay and cost that this can cause for the delivery of benefits in the public interest.

5. Whilst the reforms introduced by the LURA have been implemented, this government wants to go further. In its manifesto for the 2024 General Election, the government committed to further reforming compulsory purchase compensation rules to improve land assembly, speed up site delivery and deliver housing, infrastructure, amenity, and transport benefits in the public interest. It promised to take steps to ensure that for specific types of development schemes, landowners are awarded fair compensation rather than inflated prices based on the prospect of planning permission.

6. The government’s ‘Plan for Change’ outlined the commitment to deliver 1.5 million new homes this Parliament to address the housing crisis along with the vital infrastructure needed to grow our economy and support public services. Reform is needed to ensure we deliver this commitment so that home ownership is in reach for all our communities, the shortage of housing is addressed to lower high rents and people have access to safe and secure homes. Reform is also needed to reduce the high costs to local authorities of paying for temporary accommodation which could be alleviated by delivery of more affordable housing.

7. The government is concerned there is a significant amount of suitable land available for housing which is currently lying vacant or underutilised and not coming forward for development or, where it is coming forward for development, the provision of affordable housing offered on those sites is below the minimum ask of the local authority.

8. Our reforms will ensure the process for compulsorily acquiring land with a direction to remove the payment of hope value for schemes in the public interest is more efficient. Also, that the balance of the assessment of compensation awarded to landowners is fair and quicker decisions on CPOs can be made allowing schemes in the public interest to progress. In addition, the administrative costs of undertaking the CPO process can be reduced.

9. Section 1 of the consultation sets out our proposed reforms to the LURA power allowing directions to be sought to remove hope value from the assessment of compensation. Section 2 outlines proposals to make technical changes to improve the general CPO process and the rules for the assessment of compensation.

2. Changes to the power to limit compensation payable for the prospects of planning permission (“hope value”)

10. The Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 introduced a power for directions to be included in CPOs to remove value attributed to the prospects of planning permission (“hope value”) from the assessment of compensation for land taken. Directions to remove hope value may be included in CPOs where one of the following compulsory purchase powers is being exercised by the relevant acquiring authority:

(a) Powers authorising acquisitions for broad development schemes involving improvement, redevelopment, and regeneration purposes which must include provision of affordable/social housing (but does not have to include 100% affordable/social housing):

• Section 21A(1)(c) and (2)(c) of the Welsh Development Agency Act 1975: Acquisition of land by the Welsh Ministers
• Section 142 of the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980: Acquisitions by urban development corporations
• Section 10 of the New Towns Act 1981: Acquisitions by new town development corporations
• Section 17 of the Housing Act 1985: Acquisitions by local housing authorities
• Section 226 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990: Acquisitions by local authorities for development or planning purposes
• Section 333ZA of the Greater London Authority Act 1999: Acquisitions by Greater London Authority for housing or regeneration purposes
• Section 9 of the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008: Acquisition of land by Homes England to achieve any of its statutory purposes
• Section 207 of the Localism Act 2011: Acquisitions by mayoral development corporations

(b) Powers authorising acquisitions for purposes of the NHS:

• Paragraph 46 of Schedule 4 to the Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003 (acquisitions by NHS foundation trusts)
• Paragraph 27 of Schedule 4 to the National Health Service Act 2006 (acquisitions by NHS trusts)
• In the National Health Service (Wales) Act 2006—

(i) paragraph 20 of Schedule 2 (acquisition by local health board)

(ii) paragraph 27 of Schedule 3 (acquisition by NHS trust)

(c) Purchase powers authorising acquisitions for education purposes:

• Section 530 of the Education Act 1996 (acquisitions by local authorities for purposes of educational institution or function)

11. The acquiring authorities outlined in paragraph 10 above may include directions to remove hope value in CPOs when they are submitted for confirmation either to the Secretary of State in England or the Welsh Ministers in Wales. A CPO may be confirmed with a direction to remove hope value included providing the confirming minister is satisfied the direction is justified in the public interest.

12. Where a CPO which includes a direction to remove hope value is confirmed, the assessment of compensation for the land taken will be undertaken in accordance with section 14A of the Land Compensation Act 1961. The effect will be that section 14 of the Land Compensation Act 1961, which requires the assessment of compensation to take into account the prospects of planning permission being granted on the land (“hope value”), will not apply when compensation is assessed for the value of land taken (in accordance with rule (2) in section 5 of the Land Compensation Act 1961). Therefore, the assessment of the value of land taken will not include value attributable to:

• appropriate alternative development being established on the land by the granting of a Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development (CAAD), or
• the prospect of planning permission being granted for other development on or after the relevant valuation date.

Proposals for change

13. We want to maximise the opportunities for provision of vital development facilitating much-needed benefits in the public interest through delivery of housing, infrastructure, amenity, and transport improvements where the use of compulsory purchase powers is facilitating land assembly for those purposes. To achieve this, we propose to expand the list of CPO powers, and the associated acquiring authorities, in Schedule 2A to the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 where directions to remove hope value may be sought to include the CPO power under section 125 of the Local Government Act 1972.

14. Section 125 allows CPOs to be made on behalf of town and community councils by local authorities. We are aware of evidence collected by other government departments on the use of compulsory purchase that there is an appetite amongst some town and community councils for a more proactive approach to be taken to the use of CPOs on their behalf. Pre-consultation engagement with select town councils has indicated there is scope for an increased use of CPOs on their behalf to enable small schemes where back-to-back agreements could be arranged with registered providers of affordable housing.

15. We propose that CPOs made under section 125 of the Local Government Act 1972 on behalf of town and community councils should have the ability for directions to be included to remove hope value where the underlying schemes are facilitating affordable or social housing.

Question 1

Do you agree that directions to remove compensation payable for prospective planning permissions (“hope value”) should be allowed to be included in CPOs made on behalf of parish/town or community councils by local authorities under section 125 of the Local Government Act 1972 where the schemes underlying the orders are providing affordable or social housing?

16. Where a CPO is made without a direction included to remove hope value and it is objected to, a power exists under section 14D of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 for the confirming authority (the Secretary of State in England or the Welsh Ministers in Wales) to appoint an inspector to take a confirmation decision on their behalf. The decision to appoint an inspector to undertake the confirmation of a CPO is taken in accordance with criteria published in guidance. Where there are no objections to a CPO, which does not have a direction included to remove hope value, a power exists under section 14A of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 for the confirmation decision to be taken by the acquiring authority itself.

17. To speed-up the decision-making process for CPOs with directions removing hope value and remove ambiguity and uncertainty in the process of confirmation of CPO decisions, we believe decisions on the confirmation of CPOs which include directions to remove hope value that have been objected to should be eligible to be undertaken by inspectors. Likewise, where a CPO which includes a direction to remove hope value has been made but there are no objections to the CPO, for example, the acquiring authority and landowner reach an agreement on the voluntary acquisition of the land, we see no reason why the confirmation decision should not be taken by the acquiring authority. We would implement the proposal by amending the Acquisition of Land Act 1981.

18. To ensure consistency in the delegation of decisions relating to CPOs which include directions removing hope value, we believe the decision-making function relating to the making of a direction for additional compensation under Schedule 2A to the Land Compensation Act 1961 should also be eligible for delegation to an inspector. We would implement the proposal by amending the Acquisition of Land Act 1981.

Question 2

Do you agree that a decision on the confirmation of a CPO which includes a direction to remove value attributed to the prospects of planning permission (i.e. “hope value”) from the assessment of compensation for land taken should be eligible, where the relevant criteria in guidance are met, to be undertaken by:

(a) Inspectors where there are objections to the order; and

(b) Acquiring authorities providing there are no objections to the order?

Question 3

Do you agree that the decision-making function of the confirming authority relating to the making of a direction for additional compensation under Schedule 2A of the Land Compensation Act 1961 should be eligible to be undertaken by an inspector?

19. The government is of the view those affected by compulsory purchase should be entitled to fair compensation for their interest rather than receiving elevated values for hope value where development is delivering benefits in the public interest.

20. The government supports the approach of removing hope value compensation by the issuing of directions where CPO powers are being used to facilitate schemes which deliver vital public benefits such as affordable and social housing, schools and health facilities providing there is justification in the public interest.

21. To ensure fair value is always awarded in the circumstances where a CPO is confirmed with a direction to remove hope value, we believe it necessary to reform the legislation to make it clear that all assessments of compensation relating to market value must be undertaken in accordance with the direction. We intend to make it clear that directions to remove hope value apply not only to the assessment of compensation under rule (2) in section 5 of the Land Compensation Act 1961 for land taken but also to claims for home loss (and related) payments under the Land Compensation Act 1973 where market value of land is a component in the assessment of compensation.

22. Our proposal will remove ambiguity in the existing legislation relating to the assessment of the market value of land and apply consistent principles to the valuation of land where it is been held to be justified in the public interest to confirm a CPO with a direction removing hope value. We would implement the proposal by amending the Land Compensation Act 1961 and making consequential amendments.

Question 4

Do you agree that section 14A of the Land Compensation Act 1961 should be amended to make it clear that directions to remove hope value should apply to other heads of claim where open market value is a relevant factor in the assessment of compensation?

23. To support the government’s objectives on housing, we are exploring an alternative approach to allowing land to be compulsorily purchased without hope value through the issuing of directions. In addition to directions made under section 14A of the Land Compensation Act 1961 to remove hope value on a case-by-case basis, we are considering whether a general power could be introduced which would enable the Secretary of State in England or the Welsh Ministers in Wales to make a direction to remove hope value from the assessment of compensation for a specific category of sites where justified in the public interest. We are exploring whether such a general direction would be justified on the grounds that it will support delivery of the government’s national housing objectives, particularly for affordable housing. The following are categories of sites we think could be appropriate for the alternative approach to removing hope value:

• brownfield land in built-up areas, suitable for housing delivery, but with no extant planning permission for residential development;
• land allocated for residential development in an adopted plan but which has not come forward for development.

24. We are interested in whether this approach to removing hope value from the assessment of compensation by a direction can be justified through evidence. We recognise any approach to removing hope value from the assessment of compensation would need to be compliant with the law on human rights and ensure an appropriate balance is struck between private rights and public interest benefits.

Question 5

Another approach to removing hope value from the assessment of compensation could be to allow the Secretary of State in England or the Welsh Ministers in Wales to issue general directions for sites which meet certain defined criteria. We would welcome examples of brownfield sites suitable for housing in your areas (e.g. through an allocation) where a planning permission has not been sought along with the reasons why. In particular, examples of sites where either:

(a) it is claimed the delivery of the scheme with minimum affordable housing provision and other obligations such as provision of public infrastructure is not viable; or

(b) the costs associated with the value associated with the prospect of planning permission (“hope value”) has made the scheme unviable.

Question 6

We would welcome views on why you think, in the circumstances of the example(s) given in question 5, the removal of the value associated with the prospect of planning permission (“hope value”) where CPO powers are used could help deliver a housing scheme which meets the policy requirements of the local authority and how it would help address the problem outlined in the example.

Question 7

We would also welcome your views on whether, in the circumstances of the example(s) given in question 5, there would be any consequences of removing the value associated with the prospect of planning permission (“hope value”) from the assessment of compensation as a result of the use of CPO powers and the delivery of land for housing development.

Question 8

We would welcome views on whether there are any other categories of sites, other than those listed in question 5, which would be suitable for the proposal. If so, please give reasons why you think the removal of the value associated with the prospect of planning permission (“hope value”) where CPO powers are used in those circumstances could help deliver a housing scheme which meets the policy requirements of the local authority and how it would help address the problem outlined.

3. Technical changes to the compulsory purchase order process and compensation rules

Serving of notices by electronic means

25. The Land Compensation Act 1961 (“the 1961 Act”), Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 (“the 1965 Act”), Land Compensation Act 1973 (“the 1973 Act”), Acquisition of Land Act 1981 (“the 1981 Act”), and Compulsory Purchase (Vesting Declarations) Act 1981 (“CP(VD) Act”) set out various provisions requiring the service of notices or documents on different parties under the CPO process.

26. Despite the CP(VD) Act making provision to allow the service of notices under that Act by electronic methods, the 1961 Act, 1965 Act, 1973 Act and 1981 Act do not include equivalent provisions. The service of notices or documents on persons under these Acts is currently undertaken by either hand delivery, leaving it at their address, or by post. This can be resource-intensive and can increase the administrative cost of undertaking CPOs. In some cases, it can also result in the delay in the service of a notice or document which can lead to the slowing of the CPO process and ultimately the progress of the delivery of schemes in the public interest.

Proposals for change

27. The government proposes to amend the 1961 Act, 1965 Act, 1973 Act and 1981 Act to modernise, quicken, and reduce the administrative costs of the CPO process by allowing the service of notices under those Acts to be undertaken by electronic methods. We propose parties must give their consent to electronic service of notices by agreeing in writing and providing an address for the serving of notices by electronic methods. The giving of consent is important as it will ensure parties are aware of the service method to be used in addition to protecting their rights to be involved in the process. Where parties do not agree to receive service of notices by electronic methods, or provide an electronic address for service, we propose they will continue to receive notices by post/hand delivery/leaving it at their address under our proposals. We believe agreement to receive service of notices by electronic method and providing an electronic address for service would be a clear indication they are willing to receive notices via electronic communications.

28. Where a notice is required to be served on a public authority (e.g. acquiring authority, confirming authority etc.), for example, the serving of counter-notices on acquiring authorities under paragraph 4 in Schedule 2A to the 1965 Act, we propose there will be no requirement for that public authority to agree to receive notices electronically provided they have given an electronic address for the services of notices associated with the respective CPO. In such circumstances, it can be assumed the public authority has agreed to receive notices electronically in respect of the CPO.

29. Where an existing provision in the 1961 Act, 1965 Act, 1973 Act or 1981 Act is triggered by receipt of a notice under those Acts, our proposal is to make clear in primary legislation that where a notice is served by electronic communication, the notice will be taken to have been received on the next business day.

30. We considered making exemptions to the service of notices electronically where the service of notices could result in the recipient being liable for a penalty in the event they do not receive the notice and consequently do not take action required by that notice to avoid a penalty. For example, sections 5A and 5B of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 Act provide it is an offence for a person to fail, without reasonable excuse, to comply with a notice requiring information from them. Such exemptions could be justified if the receipt of electronic service is less reliable than receipt of other forms of service. However, we consider that:

(a) where a party has agreed in writing to receive service of notices at a particular electronic address, such service is likely comparably reliable to service by post;

(b) changing the process for various notices may give rise to confusion if recipients expect to receive service electronically; and

(c) practically, authorities serving notices should take measures to ensure the service has been received prior to resorting to enforcement action.

Question 9

Do you agree that notices and documents required to be served under the Land Compensation Act 1961, Compulsory Purchase Act 1965, Land Compensation Act 1973 and the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 should be capable of being served electronically if parties agree in writing to receive service in that manner or where the recipient is a public authority?

Content of information required to be included in newspaper notices of the making and confirmation of CPOs

31. Section 11(1) of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 (“the 1981 Act”) requires acquiring authorities to publish notices of the making of CPOs in a prescribed form in local newspapers, on a website and on site (“public notices”). Section 11(2) of the 1981 Act sets out what information must be contained in public notices. In particular, notices must “describe the land and state the purpose for which the land is required”.

32. Following commencement of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 reforms of publicity requirements for CPOs, acquiring authorities are now required to publish electronic copies of CPOs (including maps) and notices on their websites which is in addition to making copies available to view at physical locations.

33. We believe the requirement to publish notices online has created an opportunity to reduce the administrative costs on acquiring authorities by simplifying the information relating to the description of land published in newspaper notices.

Proposals for change

34. Whilst both a description of the land and the purpose for which the land is required will be stated in the CPO, there are examples of CPO notices published in newspapers where the acquiring authority has replicated the entire CPO schedule of interests. We consider it is no longer necessary or practical for newspaper notices to go into this level of detail if that detail is available online and in physical copy available for inspection, for example, in the CPO.

35. The government proposes to amend the 1981 Act to require newspaper notices, published for the purposes of advertising the making and confirmation of CPOs, to:

(a) explicitly state the postal address of the land/property included in a CPO, or

(b) where the postal address is not available, describe the location of the land/property included in a CPO, for example, “Part of the pastureland including bed of stream, culverted watercourses and associated headwalls of Strawberry Fields Farm”.

This will replace the requirement for a complete description of the land included in the CPO to be given in newspapers notices, for example, “4826 square metres part of the pastureland including bed of stream, culverted watercourses and associated headwalls of Strawberry Fields Farm on the south-west of A4999 Ellie Roundabout, on the north-west of Strawberry Fields Farm residential buildings.”.

36. We propose to retain the existing requirement under the 1981 Act for notices required to be served on qualifying persons, published on websites, or affixed on land to continue to include a complete description of the land included in the CPO. The relevant prescribed forms will be amended to reflect how the different notices should identify the land.

37. This proposal will allow the government to simplify the information relating to the description of land published in newspaper notices to deliver administrative costs savings for acquiring authorities. It will also ensure newspaper notices contain succinct and clear information regarding the description of land included in CPOs and not overly complex text. It will not affect an individual’s right to be notified of the making or confirmation of a CPO or submit a claim for compensation should the CPO be confirmed.

Question 10

Do you agree that the information relating to the description of land published in newspaper notices of the making and confirmation of CPOs should be simplified?

Allowing confirmation decisions to be taken by acquiring authorities where orders require modification

38. Section 14A of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 (“the 1981 Act”) provides a discretionary power for the Secretary of State to give the acquiring authority responsibility for confirming its own CPO if certain conditions have been met. These include that:

(a) there are no outstanding objections to the CPO;

(b) all the statutory requirements as to the service and publication of notices have been complied with; and

(c) the CPO is capable of being confirmed without modification.

Section 14A of the 1981 Act does not apply to a CPO:

(d) in respect of land—

(i). falling within section 16(1) or paragraph 3(1) of Schedule 3 to the 1981 Act, or

(ii). forming part of a common, open space or fuel or field garden allotment for the purposes of section 19 of the 1981 Act, or

(e) directing that compensation is to be assessed in accordance with section 14A of the Land Compensation Act 1961.

39. There have been instances where CPOs submitted to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government for confirmation have satisfied the conditions above except they have required modifications which in our view are non-controversial (see the Department’s Register of CPO decisions for examples). As such, the confirmation decisions could not be undertaken by the acquiring authorities. The government believes this adds unnecessary delay to the confirmation of CPOs where there are no objections to a CPO which prevents authorities from taking earlier possession of land and properties to deliver benefits in the public interest.

40. The purpose of section 14A of the 1981 Act is to allow CPOs which have no objections to be confirmed in an efficient manner by acquiring authorities. We want to extend this recognition to CPOs which have no objections but where non-controversial modifications are required to be made.

Proposals for change

41. The government wants to speed-up the decision-making process for CPOs which have not been objected to. One way to achieve this is to enable acquiring authorities to take confirmation decisions where non-controversial modifications are required to be made to CPOs providing the other conditions in paragraph 38 above have been met.

42. Our proposal is to amend section 14A of the 1981 Act to allow confirming authorities to notify acquiring authorities that they can confirm their own CPOs where non-controversial modifications are required to the CPO.

43. We consider the following modifications are non-controversial in nature and would be appropriate for the acquiring authority to make when confirming their own CPO:

• rectifying discrepancies between the CPO text (including schedule) and map such as modifying the colour used to identify plots of land on the map to reflect the wording used in the CPO text
• removing an interest from a CPO schedule and/or map (which is usually done with ink to strike through an interest in one of the tables in the schedule and/or the red line boundary on the map) where the acquiring authority no longer proposes to acquire that land through the CPO process
• inserting a new interest in the CPO schedule and map where the person has agreed for their interest to be included
• correcting grammatical or spelling errors in the CPO text, schedule or map
• inserting dashes (-) or “n/a” into all the blank entries in Tables 1 and 2 of a CPO schedule
• amending the title of the map to match the title of the CPO
• inserting definition of the relevant Acts “The Town and Country Planning Act 1990” and “The Acquisition of Land Act 1981” in the CPO text

44. Where a proposed modification to a CPO may provoke an objection or be otherwise controversial, for example the inclusion of additional land in the CPO without the consent of the owner, we consider the confirmation of the CPO should be undertaken by the confirming authority.

45. We propose the confirming authority, when giving notice to the acquiring authority under section 14A(1)(a) of the 1981 Act that it may exercise the power to confirm the CPO itself, will set out the modification(s) which are required be made to the respective CPO by the acquiring authority. We propose the acquiring authority will then physically make those changes to the CPO and when notifying the confirming authority that it confirmed the order with modifications (under section 14A(6) of the 1981 Act), will be required to:

(a) provide a copy of the CPO as confirmed by the acquiring authority; and

(b) provide certification that it only made those modifications to the CPO which were set out in the confirming authority’s notice.

Question 11

Do you agree that where a CPO requires modification to rectify an error such as a drafting mistake or to remove a plot of land from the schedule and/or map, the acquiring authority should be able to confirm the CPO itself by making the required modification(s) providing: (a) all other conditions under section 14A of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 have been met, and (b) the proposed modifications are non-controversial in the manner set out in the consultation ?

Question 12

Are there any modifications which you think should or should not be capable of being made by the acquiring authority (in addition to the inclusion of additional land in a CPO without the consent of the owner) when confirming its own CPO?

Allowing the delegation of decisions on the confirmation of compulsory purchase orders made under the New Towns Act 1981

46. Under the New Towns Act 1981 all CPOs must be submitted by the acquiring authority to the relevant Secretary of State for confirmation.

47. Where a CPO is to be made and confirmed in accordance with the Acquisition of Land Act 1981, where a CPO is submitted to the Secretary of State under that Act and it is contested, the Secretary of State has discretion under section 14D of that Act to allow an inspector to confirm the CPO. Currently, decisions on CPOs made under the New Towns Act 1981 are not able to be delegated by the Secretary of State.

Proposals for change

48. We believe a power like section 14D of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 should also be included in the New Towns Act 1981 to enable decisions on CPOs made under that Act to be taken by inspectors on the Secretary of State’s behalf where there are objections to a CPO. The government would implement its proposal by amending Schedule 4 of the New Towns Act 1981.

49. As for decisions on CPOs made under the Acquisition of Land Act 1981, we consider the appointment of inspectors to undertake confirmation decisions under the New Towns Act 1981 will not be appropriate in all cases and a Secretary of State may decide not to appoint an inspector to take any decisions. Where appointment of an inspector is proposed, the same criteria as set out in the government’s Guidance on the Compulsory Purchase Process will apply.

50. Where an inspector is appointed under the New Towns Act 1981, notification will be provided to interested persons.

51. As an additional safeguard, we propose to ensure that where a Secretary of State has decided to appoint an inspector, there is also a power to “recover” the case back for their own determination at any time until the decision is issued. This would allow for consideration of exceptional cases where, for example, an important novel issue has emerged during the course of the confirmation process which means the decision should be made directly by the Secretary of State.

52. Our proposal would not affect the confirmation of CPOs applied for under Schedule 5 to the New Towns Act 1981.

Question 13

Do you agree that the Secretary of State should be able to appoint an inspector to undertake a decision on whether to confirm or refuse a CPO made under the New Towns Act 1981?

Amending section 18 of the Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017 to allow for the compulsory acquisition of temporary possession via existing powers

53. The ability to use temporary possession powers where compulsory purchase is proposed is important. Many developments require the temporary use of land, for example as worksites or storing of materials needed for the development which is the subject of the compulsory purchase. Where land is required on a temporary basis currently the acquiring authority must either:

• obtain a permanent right compulsorily over the land they need (usually providing an assurance letter to the landowner confirming that the land will only be required for a certain period of time); or
• enter into a commercial agreement with the landowner concerned.

54. This can result in acquiring authorities being unable to obtain the land they need at a reasonable cost or the implementation of the scheme being delayed while negotiations take place.

55. The Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017 (“NPA 2017”) introduced temporary possession provisions for the compulsory acquisition of land to give all acquiring authorities the same power to enter and/or use land temporarily. The NPA 2017 temporary possession provisions have not yet been commenced. Stakeholders have raised concerns about how these provisions will operate in practice alongside other powers to enter and/or use land temporarily available under Transport and Works Act Orders (“TWAOs”) made under the Transport and Works Act 1992 (“the 1992 Act) and Development Consent Orders (“DCOs”) made under the Planning Act 2008 (“the 2008 Act”). Stakeholders have also expressed concerns that the drafting of the NPA 2017 temporary possession provisions limits the extent of powers under these other processes where they apply. We share the concerns of stakeholders.

56. We are eager to commence the NPA 2017 temporary possession provisions for other compulsory purchase regimes, including for CPOs authorised under the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 and the New Towns Act 1981 as we recognise the benefits of providing general temporary possession powers. Without sufficient temporary possession powers, acquiring authorities are prevented from assembling land efficiently via use of CPOs to facilitate schemes in the public interest.

Proposals for change

57. We propose to amend the NPA 2017 temporary possession provisions to allow TWAOs and DCOs to continue to provide for the acquisition of temporary possession. This will introduce flexibility and allow the NPA 2017 temporary possession provisions to be commenced for the authorisation of taking temporary possession of land under other regimes such as the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 without interfering with how temporary possession is obtained under the 1992 Act or the 2008 Act. It will also contribute to the government’s plan to speed-up the delivery of critical infrastructure and simplifying the consenting process for major infrastructure projects.

58. Whilst not a subject of this consultation, we are aware of proposals under consideration by the Department for Transport to introduce provisions within the Highways Act 1980 to provide acquiring authorities who may be authorised to acquire land compulsorily under that Act with additional powers related to ancillary rights over land which would include the power to take temporary possession of land. Such powers under the Highways Act 1980 would operate independently from the NPA 2017 temporary possession provisions. An amendment to the Highways Act 1980 would be required to implement this proposal.

Question 14

Do you agree the temporary possession powers available under the Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017 do not need to apply to the taking of temporary possession of land under the Transport and Works Act 1992 and Planning Act 2008 as there are sufficient provisions under those consenting regimes which provide for the temporary possession of land?

Expedited notice process for vesting of interests in land

59. Once a CPO has been confirmed, the acquiring authority can begin the process of taking possession of the land/property by giving notice to occupiers and others with an interest in the land/property. The actual taking of possession will be proceeded by 1 of 2 routes - either by the acquiring authority serving a notice to treat or by executing a general vesting declaration.

60. General vesting declarations are made under the Compulsory Purchase (Vesting Declarations) Act 1981 and in accordance with the Compulsory Purchase of Land (Vesting Declarations) (England) Regulations 2017. They may be made for any part or all of the land included in the CPO except where an acquiring authority has already served (and not withdrawn) a notice to treat in respect of that land.

61. Section 5A of the Compulsory Purchase (Vesting Declarations) Act 1981 makes clear that a general vesting declaration may not be executed after the end of the period of 3 years beginning with the day on which the CPO becomes operative or such longer period as extended by the confirming authority under section 13D of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981. Before an acquiring authority can take possession of land/property included in a confirmed CPO, it must give a minimum of 3 months’ notice (i.e. the vesting period) to those with an interest in the land/property. Generally, the purpose of the minimum 3 months’ notice is to allow those who occupy or otherwise use the land/property (including to access other land), time to make alternative arrangements, including moving out, arranging replacement accommodation or access, or negotiating continuing access rights after transfer of the land/property to the acquiring authority.

62. A common complaint about taking possession of empty properties and/or vacant land (including unregistered land) under the general vesting declaration procedure is its inflexible nature. There must always be a fair balance between: (a) the interests of parties affected by a CPO in having an adequate notice period before possession of land or properties will transfer to an acquiring authority, and (b) the interests of acquiring authorities delivering public benefits as quickly as possible. However, once a decision has been made to confirm a CPO and all regulatory requirements have been complied with, we believe a flexible, expedited notice process should be available in certain, clearly defined circumstances under the general vesting declaration procedure to deliver benefits in the public interest at pace. Such circumstances include where the relevant property is unoccupied or vacant and either unhabitable or incapable of legal commercial use. We believe it is in the public interest to expedite the taking of possession for such land to avoid anti-social behaviour resulting in damage and nuisance to neighbouring communities and to bring otherwise wasted housing resources into use.

63. Local authorities which undertake compulsory purchase of vacant properties have highlighted to us that an expedited notice process would also be useful where an owner, who has not been in occupation of a property for unforeseen reasons like incarceration or ill-health, or a person legally entitled to take decisions on behalf of the owner (e.g. established through lasting power of attorney, probate, a trust, or Court of Protection Order etc), is content for their property to transfer to the acquiring authority at pace. Persons legally entitled to take decisions on behalf of property owners are often content for the responsibilities associated with maintaining unhabitable properties to pass to acquiring authorities.

64. We can see no reason why the general vesting declaration procedure should not be flexible and allow the vesting of land or property in an acquiring authority to occur more quickly where the owner or person legally entitled to take decisions on behalf of the owner is in agreement.

65. We consider the expedited notice process should not allow for the early vesting of land/property where a business is capable of being operated legally due to the existing physical condition of the land/property, for example agricultural land, as owners of land/property should be given the minimum 3 months’ notice period to remove any possessions from the land/property. Also, where there is no written agreement between the acquiring authority and an owner for the early vesting of their land/property which is in a legally occupiable physical condition. This would not include land/property which would require redevelopment/refurbishment/improvements work to be undertaken before a business could occupy and operate legally e.g. a disused industrial unit requiring improvements works before it could re-open to allow a business to operate safely.

66. We consider an expedited notice process is justified where compensation remains claimable after land/property has vested in the acquiring authority.

Proposals for change

67. We propose to implement our proposal by amending the Compulsory Purchase (Vesting Declarations) Act 1981 to allow acquiring authorities to access an expedited notice process in the following circumstances:

(a) At the date the general vesting declaration is executed, that the land or property subject to the confirmed CPO is not legally occupiable due to its current physical condition – it would be immaterial whether the CPO was objected to or not.

(b) Where no responses were received to notices served or published relating to a CPO authorising the acquisition of an interest in land/property and no objections were made to the CPO.

We consider it to be in the public interest for the benefits of schemes underlying CPOs in these circumstances to be delivered to communities without unnecessary delay.

68. We are also considering whether it would be appropriate for the expedited notice process to apply where there is an agreement in writing between an acquiring authority and an owner of an interest which is to vest in the acquiring authority regardless of the physical state and/or legal use of the land/property subject to the CPO.

69. Where any of the circumstances in paragraphs 67 and 68 apply, we think a general vesting declaration should be executable to vest the land or property in the acquiring authority at the end of a minimum vesting period of 6 weeks, instead of 3 months, from the date the notice required to be served under section 6(1) of the Compulsory Purchase (Vesting Declarations) Act 1981 specifying the land/property and stating the effect of the general vesting declaration is completed.

70. Allowing a minimum vesting period of 6 weeks would allow additional interests in land/property to come to light before it vests in the acquiring authority. It would also mean the vesting of the land/property would not occur before the expiry of the period in which any challenge to the confirmation of the CPO can be made in the High Court (i.e. section 23 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981). If additional interests in land/property do come to light within the expedited 6 weeks’ notice period, we intend to provide a mechanism by which the expedited process will no longer be effective and the notice period for vesting of the land/property will revert to the minimum 3-months period. Under section 8A of the Compulsory Purchase (Vesting Declaration) Act 1981 the 3-months period may be postponed further by agreement between the acquiring authority and the person with the additional interest to allow additional time for that person to take the appropriate action. To ensure maximum flexibility for acquiring authorities, the power to postpone the vesting period by agreement under section 8A will also apply in the circumstances where they have chosen to use the expedited 6 weeks’ notice process.

71. We propose to amend the prescribed form of notice specifying the land and stating the effect of a general vesting declaration (required under section 6(1) of the Compulsory Purchase (Vesting Declarations) Act 1981) to reflect our proposal to allow an expedited notice process for the vesting of interests in land or property.

Question 15

Do you agree there should be an expedited notice process for the vesting of interests in land and properties under the general vesting declaration procedure in the circumstances outlined in the consultation?

Question 16

If you answered positively to question 15, we would welcome views on whether there are any other circumstances where the expedited notice process for the vesting of interests in land in an acquiring authority should apply?

Question 17

If you answered positively to question 15, do you agree those with an interest in land included in a CPO should be able to enter into an agreement with the acquiring authority for their interest to vest in the authority earlier than the existing minimum 3-months’ notice period?

Assessing compensation: Reverse loss payment share for landlords and occupiers

72. Sections 33A-33F of the Land Compensation Act 1973 (“the 1973 Act”) provide for loss payments to be made to owners and occupiers of land to be compulsorily acquired. These payments are to reflect some of the inconvenience and upheaval caused by compulsory purchase which is not reflected in disturbance compensation payable. They are also an acknowledgement that a party is displaced from property against their will.

73. The loss payments are in 2 parts – the basic loss payment and the occupier’s loss payment. The basic loss payment is available to people with a freehold interest in the land or at least a one-year long tenancy interest in the land. The occupier’s loss payment is only available to those in occupation of all or part of the land. Owner-occupiers can receive both parts.

74. The current basic loss payment is 7.5% of the value of the person’s interest in the land up to a maximum of £75,000.

75. The current occupier’s loss payment is the greater of:

• 2.5% of the value of the occupier’s interest in the land up to a maximum of £25,000,
• the land amount,
• the buildings amount - £25 per square metre of gross external floor space.

76. There are different rates for the “land amount” for agricultural land and non-agricultural land. For agricultural land it is calculated as the greater of £300 or £100 per hectare for holdings not exceeding 100 hectares or, for holdings exceeding 100 hectares, £100 per hectare for the first 100 hectares and £50 per hectare for the next 300 hectares. For non-agricultural land it is calculated as the greater of £2,500 or £2.50 per square metre of the area of land.

77. The most common situation for commercial premises is to have an investor landlord with a valuable freehold or long leasehold interest in the land and an occupying business tenant with a lease at a market rent. In this scenario, the investor landlord would receive a basic loss payment of 7.5% of the freehold value (or £75,000 if lower).

78. The market value of a freehold interest held by an occupier-owner or an investor owner is usually substantially larger than the market value of a leasehold interest in the land held by an occupying tenant which often has little or no market value. As a result, an occupying tenant will almost always receive:

a) little to no basic loss payment despite having a qualifying interest, and

b) the occupier’s loss payment based on the land or buildings amount (rather than 2.5% of the value of their interest given the low value of that interest).

79. However, it is the occupying tenant who bears the burden of having to close or relocate their business operation. We consider the allocation of the current basic and occupier’s loss payments is poorly targeted and unduly favours investor owners over occupying business or agricultural tenants who incur the greater cost which is unfair.

80. There is a further minor related issue which we wish to address – the basis for calculating the buildings amount under the occupier’s loss payment regime. At present, this is based on gross external area. However, it has been suggested this measurement is difficult to measure in practice and is also inconsistent with market practice for the measurement of most buildings.

Proposals for change

81. We wish to amend sections 33A – 33C of the 1973 Act to adjust the balance of loss payments in favour of occupiers. We also want to simplify the basis for calculating the ‘buildings amount’ of the loss payment.

82. This government wants to ensure compensation paid to those whose land or property is acquired is fair. To achieve this, we propose to take forward the proposals to reverse how loss payments are allocated between basic loss payments and occupier’s loss payments by amending sections 33A – 33C of the 1973 Act to adjust the balance of loss payments in favour of occupiers. We believe reversing the current percentages of loss payments will better reflect the relative level of disruption and inconvenience caused to claimants.

83. Under our proposals:

(a) Basic loss payments will be adjusted to 2.5% (from 7.5%) of the market value of the interest in the land, subject to a maximum of £25,000 (from £75,000). This will reduce how much basic loss is paid to investor owners but will have little effect on how much basic loss is paid to occupying tenants.

(b) Occupier’s loss payments for agricultural land will be adjusted as follows:

(i). 7.5% (from 2.5%) of the market value of their interest in the land, subject to a new maximum of £75,000 (from £25,000); or

(ii). £75 (from £25) per square metre of building; or

(iii). the greater of £900 (from £300) total or £300 (from £100) per hectare or part of a hectare (for holdings not exceeding 100 hectares) or for holdings exceeding 100 hectares, £300 (from £100) per hectare for the first 100 hectares and £150 (from £50) per hectare for the next 300 hectares or part of a hectare.

(c) Occupier’s loss payments for non-agricultural land will be adjusted as follows:

(i). 7.5% (from 2.5%) of the market value of their interest in the land, subject to a new maximum of £75,000 (from £25,000); or

(ii). £75 (from £25) per square metre of building; or

(iii). the greater of £7,500 (from £2,500) total or £7.50 (from £2.50) per square metre (or part of a square metre) of land, or where only part of land in which a person has an interest is acquired, £900 (from £300).

84. We also intend to simplify the method of calculating the “buildings amount” under occupier’s loss payments. We propose to change the calculation of “buildings amount”, i.e. the building occupied by the claimant, from “gross external area” to “gross internal floor area”. An issue with using “gross external area” to calculate the buildings amount is that it is physically difficult to establish and must usually be measured specifically for the compensation claim. Our view is “gross internal floor area” is a defined, well understood industry recognised measuring practice standard which is a consistent market practice for the measurement of buildings. “Gross internal floor area” practice also allows for valuations to be undertaken from building plans and can deliver quick valuations in practice given these measurements may have been used at a building previously for letting or rent review purposes.

Question 18

Do you agree that the current loss payments should be adjusted as set out in the consultation?

Question 19

Do you agree that the method of calculating the “buildings amount” under sections 33B(10) – 33C(11) of the Land Compensation Act 1973 should be changed to “gross internal floor area”?

Assessing compensation: Home loss payments exclusions

85. Where a person is occupying a property which is subject to a CPO, they may be entitled to a home loss payment in addition to any other compensation which may be due e.g. the market value of the property. Sections 29 – 33 of the Land Compensation Act 1973 provide for home loss payments as an additional sum of compensation to reflect the distress, inconvenience and discomfort of people being compelled to move out of their home.

86. To qualify for a home loss payment, the following criteria need to be fulfilled:

• the person must have lived in the dwelling, or a substantial part of it, as their only or main residence, for a period of not less than 1 year ending with the day they have to move out; and
• their interest or right to occupy the dwelling was freehold, leasehold or under certain specified statutory tenancies, contracts and licences.

87. Unlike basic and occupier’s loss payments, there are currently no exclusions on discretionary home loss payments. Under section 33D(4) of the Land Compensation Act 1973, basic and occupier’s loss payments may be excluded where certain statutory enforcement notices or orders (listed under section 33D(4) of the Land Compensation Act 1973) have been served on a person but they have failed to take the required action on the date the relevant CPO is confirmed.

Proposals for change

88. Local authorities can expend significant resource and cost using compulsory purchase powers to acquire neglected properties to deliver public benefits through refurbishment. The government is of the view an exclusion to discretionary home loss payments should be introduced in the circumstances where a property owner has failed to comply with a statutory enforcement notice/order served on them by the time the relevant CPO is confirmed. This is because the result of non-compliance with statutory enforcement notices/orders by a property owner may increase the costs to the public purse of improving the property and bringing it into effective use. We think introducing this exclusion to discretionary home loss payments will assist in lowering the costs for local authorities to deliver improvements in the public interest through the compulsory purchase of neglected properties. It may also provide an incentive for statutory enforcement notices/orders to be complied with.

89. The government is of the view that as property owners would still be compensated for the market value for their property, and may be eligible to reclaim other costs such as relocation costs and professional fees etc, the proposal is justified. We propose home loss payments under section 29 of the Land Compensation Act 1973 should be excluded on the same basis as basic and occupier’s loss payments are under section 33D of the Land Compensation Act 1973. This would require an amendment to section 33D of the Land Compensation Act 1973.

Question 20

Do you agree that exclusions to home loss payments should apply where one of the statutory enforcement notices or orders listed under section 33D(4) and (5) of the Land Compensation Act 1973 has been served on a person and they have failed to take the required action on the day the relevant CPO which their property is subject to is confirmed?

4. Impact assessment

90. A number of these proposals may have an impact on authorities using compulsory purchase powers which may include businesses (known as ‘acquiring authorities’) or those whose interests are being compulsorily acquired (‘claimants’) which include landowners or businesses. The business interests in individual compulsory purchase orders (CPOs) will vary. Some CPOs are proposed by local authorities, private sector businesses such as statutory undertakers, or by local authorities who have an agreement with a private sector developer, for example, to deliver a town centre redevelopment scheme.

91. Some of the proposals will have a negligible impact on both acquiring authorities and claimants. These are:

(a) allow decisions on the confirmation of CPOs which include directions to remove hope value to be delegated to inspectors where there are objections to a CPO or acquiring authorities where there are no objections to a CPO;

(b) allow the delegation of decisions on the confirmation of CPOs made under the New Towns Act 1981;

(c) amend the Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017 to allow for the compulsory acquisition of temporary possession via existing powers.

92. The following proposals will provide net benefits for acquiring authorities and have negligible impact on claimants:

(a) allow the service of notices required to be served under the Land Compensation Act 1961, Compulsory Purchase Act 1965, Land Compensation Act 1973 and the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 to be undertaken electronically;

(b) simplifying the information required to be published in newspaper notices;

(c) allow the delegation of decisions on the confirmation of CPOs to acquiring authorities where CPOs require modification where certain conditions have been met; and

(d) introduce an expedited process for the taking possession of land under the general vesting declaration procedure.

93. The proposals to:

(a) expand the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 direction power to remove value attributable to the prospect of planning permission (“hope value”) from compensation to other CPO making powers i.e. section 125 of the Local Government Act 1972;

(b) ensure value attributed to hope value is removed from all assessment of market value under LURA directions removing hope value; and

(c) allow the Secretary of State in England or the Welsh Ministers in Wales to issue directions to remove hope value for a certain category of sites

are likely to have a cost impact for claimants. This is because potential claimants may receive less compensation than they might otherwise have done if a CPO is confirmed where a direction removing hope value exists.

94. The proposals outlined in paragraph 93 are, however, likely to impact a very limited number of claimants given the number of directions likely to be made in any year is estimated to be low. The impact is further restricted as use of compulsory purchase powers is an optional mechanism which acquiring authorities can choose to use where negotiations to acquire land have failed to support the delivery of a range of development, regeneration and infrastructure projects in the public interest providing there is a compelling case. Also, only a small fraction of land is brought forward and acquired for development through compulsory purchase powers resulting in a relatively small number of claimants (businesses/individuals) being impacted compared with wider land interests. In addition, the proposal to expand the LURA direction power to include an additional CPO making power is further limited to CPOs where the underlying scheme must be facilitating provision of affordable or social housing where the Secretary of State or Welsh Ministers will consider whether there is a compelling case in the public interest.

95. The following existing safeguards are in place which will also mitigate against any potential impact to claimants caused by the proposals outlined in paragraph 93:

(i). The proposals are limited in scope (applying only to certain sites/acquiring authorities/CPO making powers in specified circumstances).

(ii). Affected claimants will continue to receive all other compensation payments they are entitled to e.g. disturbance payments and payments related to extant planning permissions.

(iii). When exercising the direction power to remove hope value in the context of the additional CPO making power listed in paragraph 93(a), the acquiring authority will be required to provide a statement of the number of units of affordable housing the underlying scheme will provide.

(iv). The acquiring authority must notify the landowner that a CPO is being made with a direction removing hope value included and qualifying persons (claimants) will be able to object.

(v). The legislation requires the confirming authority must be satisfied that the direction removing hope value is in the public interest, having considered any objections.

(vi). Published guidance makes it clear that such a direction removing hope value will only be issued in the public interest.

(vii). A person aggrieved with the making of a direction removing hope value will have the right to apply to the High Court under section 23(2) of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 for review of the decision (and ultimately the decision of the confirming authority will be subject to judicial review).

(viii). Disputes about the amount of compensation will be able to be referred to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

(ix). The effect of a direction removing hope value will be capable of being reversed, on application, if the land is not subsequently used as planned.

96. The proposal to introduce exclusions for home loss payments could have a cost impact for some claimants. However, the impacts are limited as the proposal would only apply where one of the statutory enforcement notices/orders listed under section 33D(4) or (5) of the Land Compensation Act 1973 has been served on a property owner who has not complied with the notice/order at the time the relevant CPO is confirmed. The impacts are further limited as home loss payments are discretionary and not automatically claimable.

97. The proposal to reverse the loss payment share will benefit claimant occupiers who will receive more compensation but be a cost to claimant landowners who will receive less. We consider this allocation of payments more fairly reflects the inconvenience and costs incurred as a result of compulsory purchase.

Question 21

Do you have any comments on the likely impact of the proposals outlined in this consultation on business interests both for the acquiring authority and claimants?

5. Equality impact assessment

98. Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 requires the government, when exercising its functions, to pay due regard to the need to:

• eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act
• advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not
• foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not

99. The relevant protected characteristics are:

• age
• disability
• sex
• gender reassignment
• marriage or civil partnership
• pregnancy and maternity
• race
• religion or belief
• sexual orientation

100. Compulsory purchase in general can have an equalities impact and a particular scheme may have an adverse effect on persons with protected characteristics.

101. We have undertaken an initial assessment while developing these proposals for consultation. In relation to the proposals outlined in Chapter 2 of this consultation, where either:

(a) an acquiring authority considers making a CPO which includes a direction removing hope value, and a confirming authority decides whether to confirm that CPO with the direction included, or

(b) the Secretary of State decides to make a direction removing hope value for a certain category of sites, as part of that decision-making the relevant decision-maker will need to weigh-up any adverse effect on persons with protected characteristics.

Also, the balance in the public interest of making, or confirming, a direction to remove hope value against those adverse effects which may be to the advantage of those with protected characteristics, for example, the facilitation of public benefits in the public interest. Overall, our view is that the proposals allow for a full consideration of the equality impacts before decisions are taken on whether directions removing hope value should be allowed. As set out in paragraphs 93 – 95 above, the proposals may have a small impact on claimants, who may or may not have protected characteristics, which may have cost implications.

102. The proposals outlined in Chapter 3 of this consultation are intended to ensure the balance of the assessment of compensation awarded to landowners is fair, quicker decisions on CPOs can be made, and the administrative costs of undertaking the CPO process are reduced. As set out in paragraphs 91 - 92 above, it is considered the proposals will have a negligible impact on persons with protected characteristics.

103. As set out in paragraphs 96 - 97 above, it is considered the proposals to reverse the loss payment share and exclude discretionary home loss payments may have impacts on claimant landowners and claimant property owners, who may or may not have protected characteristics, which may have cost implications.

104. After undertaking the initial assessment, we cannot envisage how the proposals will have a differential impact on those with protected characteristics as opposed to those who do not share these characteristics. However, we would welcome others’ views on any potential equalities impacts arising from these proposed changes, especially those proposals where there is potential for claimants to receive less compensation.

Question 22

Do you consider there are potential equalities impacts arising from any of the proposals in this consultation? Please provide details including your views on how any impacts might be addressed.

6. About this consultation

105. This consultation document and consultation process have been planned to adhere to the Consultation Principles issued by the Cabinet Office.

106. Representative groups are asked to give a summary of the people and organisations they represent, and where relevant who else they have consulted in reaching their conclusions when they respond.

107. Information provided in response to this consultation may be published or disclosed in accordance with the access to information regimes (these are primarily the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 and UK data protection legislation. In certain circumstances this may therefore include personal data when required by law.

108. If you want the information that you provide to be treated as confidential, please be aware that, as a public authority, MHCLG is bound by the information access regimes and may therefore be obliged to disclose all or some of the information you provide. In view of this it would be helpful if you could explain to us why you regard the information you have provided as confidential. If we receive a request for disclosure of the information we will take full account of your explanation, but we cannot give an assurance that confidentiality can be maintained in all circumstances. An automatic confidentiality disclaimer generated by your IT system will not, of itself, be regarded as binding on MHCLG.

109. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government will at all times process your personal data in accordance with UK data protection legislation and in the majority of circumstances this will mean that your personal data will not be disclosed to third parties. A full privacy notice is included below.

110. Individual responses will not be acknowledged unless specifically requested.

111. Your opinions are valuable to us. Thank you for taking the time to read this document and respond.

112. Are you satisfied that this consultation has followed the Consultation Principles? If not or you have any other observations about how we can improve the process please contact us via the complaints procedure.

Personal data

113. The following is to explain your rights and give you the information you are entitled to under UK data protection legislation.

114. Note that this section only refers to personal data (your name, contact details and any other information that relates to you or another identified or identifiable individual personally) not the content otherwise of your response to the consultation.

1. The identity of the data controller and contact details of our Data Protection Officer   

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) is the data controller. The Data Protection Officer can be contacted at dataprotection@communities.gov.uk or by writing to the following address:

Data Protection Officer
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Fry Building
2 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DF

2. Why we are collecting your personal data  

Your personal data is being collected as an essential part of the consultation process, so that we can contact you regarding your response and for statistical purposes. We may also use it to contact you about related matters.

We will collect your IP address if you complete a consultation online. We may use this to ensure that each person only completes a survey once. We will not use this data for any other purpose.

Sensitive types of personal data

Please do not share special category personal data or criminal offence data  if we have not asked for this unless absolutely necessary for the purposes of your consultation response. By ‘special category personal data’, we mean information about a living individual’s:

• race
• ethnic origin
• political opinions
• religious or philosophical beliefs
• trade union membership
• genetics
• biometrics 
• health (including disability-related information)
• sex life; or
• sexual orientation.

By ‘criminal offence data’, we mean information relating to a living individual’s criminal convictions or offences or related security measures.

3. Our legal basis for processing your personal data

The collection of your personal data is lawful under article 6(1)(e) of the UK General Data Protection Regulation as it is necessary for the performance by DLUHC of a task in the public interest/in the exercise of official authority vested in the data controller.  Section 8(d) of the Data Protection Act 2018 states that this will include processing of personal data that is necessary for the exercise of a function of the Crown, a Minister of the Crown or a government department i.e. in this case a consultation.

4. With whom we will be sharing your personal data

MHCLG may appoint a ‘data processor’, acting on behalf of the department and under our instruction, to help analyse the responses to this consultation.  Where we do we will ensure that the processing of your personal data remains in strict accordance with the requirements of the data protection legislation.

5. For how long we will keep your personal data, or criteria used to determine the retention period

Your personal data will be held for 2 years from the closure of the consultation, unless we identify that its continued retention is unnecessary before that point.

6. Your rights, e.g. access, rectification, restriction, objection

The data we are collecting is your personal data, and you have considerable say over what happens to it. You have the right:

a. to see what data we have about you

b. to ask us to stop using your data, but keep it on record

c. to ask to have your data corrected if it is incorrect or incomplete

d. to object to our use of your personal data in certain circumstances

e. to lodge a complaint with the independent Information Commissioner (ICO) if you think we are not handling your data fairly or in accordance with the law.  You can contact the ICO at https://ico.org.uk/, or telephone 0303 123 1113.

Please contact us at the following address if you wish to exercise the rights listed above, except the right to lodge a complaint with the ICO: dataprotection@communities.gov.uk or

Knowledge and Information Access Team
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Fry Building
2 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DF

7. Your personal data will not be sent overseas

8. Your personal data will not be used for any automated decision making

9. Your personal data will be stored in a secure government IT system

We use a third-party system, Citizen Space, to collect consultation responses. In the first instance your personal data will be stored on their secure UK-based server. Your personal data will be transferred to our secure government IT system as soon as possible, and it will be stored there for 2 years before it is deleted.

Annex A: Consultation questions

Question 1: Do you agree that directions to remove compensation payable for prospective planning permissions (“hope value”) should be allowed to be included in CPOs made on behalf of parish/town or community councils by local authorities under section 125 of the Local Government Act 1972 where the schemes underlying the orders are providing affordable or social housing?

Question 2: Do you agree that a decision on the confirmation of a CPO which includes a direction to remove value attributed to the prospects of planning permission (i.e. “hope value”) from the assessment of compensation for land taken should be eligible, where the relevant criteria in guidance are met, to be undertaken by:

• Inspectors where there are objections to the order; and
• Acquiring authorities providing there are no objections to the order?

Question 3:  Do you agree that the decision-making function of the confirming authority relating to the making of a direction for additional compensation under Schedule 2 of the Land Compensation Act 1961 should be eligible to be undertaken by an inspector?

Question 4: Do you agree that section 14A of the Land Compensation Act 1961 should be amended to make it clear that directions to remove hope value should apply to other heads of claim where open market value is a relevant factor in the assessment of compensation?

Question 5: Another approach to removing hope value from the assessment of compensation could be to allow the Secretary of State in England or the Welsh Ministers in Wales to issue general directions for sites which meet certain defined criteria. We would welcome examples of brownfield sites suitable for housing in your areas (e.g. through an allocation) where a planning permission has not been sought along with the reasons why. In particular, examples of sites where either:

• it is claimed the delivery of the scheme with minimum affordable housing provision and other obligations such as provision of public infrastructure is not viable; or
• the costs associated with the value associated with the prospect of planning permission (“hope value”) has made the scheme unviable.

Question 6: We would welcome views on why you think, in the circumstances of the example(s) given in question 5, the removal of the value associated with the prospect of planning permission (“hope value”) where CPO powers are used could help deliver a housing scheme which meets the policy requirements of the local authority and how it would help address the problem outlined in the example.

Question 7: We would also welcome your views on whether, in the circumstances of the example(s) given in question 5, there would be any consequences of removing the value associated with the prospect of planning permission (“hope value”) from the assessment of compensation as a result of the use of CPO powers and the delivery of land for housing development.

Question 8: We would welcome views on whether there are any other categories of sites, other than those listed in question 5, which would be suitable for the proposal. If so, please give reasons why you think the removal of the value associated with the prospect of planning permission (“hope value”) where CPO powers are used in those circumstances could help deliver a housing scheme which meets the policy requirements of the local authority and how it would help address the problem outlined.

Question 9: Do you agree that notices and documents required to be served under the Land Compensation Act 1961, Compulsory Purchase Act 1965, Land Compensation Act 1973 and the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 should be capable of being served electronically if parties agree in writing to receive service in that manner or where the recipient is a public authority?

Question 10: Do you agree that the information relating to the description of land published in newspaper notices of the making and confirmation of CPOs should be simplified?

Question 11: Do you agree that where a CPO requires modification to rectify an error such as a drafting mistake or to remove a plot of land from the schedule and/or map, the acquiring authority should be able to confirm the CPO itself by making the required modification(s) providing: (a) all other conditions under section 14A of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 have been met, and (b) the proposed modifications are non-controversial in the manner set out in the consultation?

Question 12: Are there any modifications which you think should or should not be capable of being made by the acquiring authority (in addition to the inclusion of additional land in a CPO without the consent of the owner) when confirming its own CPO?

Question 13: Do you agree that the Secretary of State should be able to appoint an inspector to undertake a decision on whether to confirm or refuse a CPO made under the New Towns Act 1981?

Question 14: Do you agree the temporary possession powers available under the Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017 do not need to apply to the taking of temporary possession of land under the Transport and Works Act 1992 and Planning Act 2008 as there are sufficient provisions under those consenting regimes which provide for the temporary possession of land?

Question 15: Do you agree there should be an expedited notice process for the vesting of interests in land and properties under the general vesting declaration procedure in the circumstances outlined in the consultation?

Question 16: If you answered positively to question 15, we would welcome views on whether there are any other circumstances where the expedited notice process for the vesting of interests in land in an acquiring authority should apply?

Question 17: If you answered positively to question 15, do you agree those with an interest in land included a CPO should be able to enter into an agreement with the acquiring authority for their interest to vest in the authority earlier than the existing minimum 3-months’ notice period?

Question 18: Do you agree that the current loss payments should be adjusted as set out in the consultation?

Question 19: Do you agree that the method of calculating the “buildings amount” under sections 33B(10) – 33C(11) of the Land Compensation Act 1973 should be changed to “gross internal floor area”?

Question 20: Do you agree that exclusions to home loss payments should apply where one of the statutory enforcement notices or orders listed under section 33D(4) and (5) of the Land Compensation Act 1973 has been served on a person and they have failed to take the required action on the day the relevant CPO which their property is subject to is confirmed?

Question 21: Do you have any comments on the likely impact of the proposals outlined in this consultation on business interests both for the acquiring authority and claimants?

Question 22: Do you consider there are potential equalities impacts arising from any of the proposals in this consultation? Please provide details including your views on how any impacts might be addressed.