FURIOUS families who live next door to Southend Airport are demanding compensation for a loss in value to their homes.

Homeowners who use sleeping tablets and can’t use their gardens are pleading with airport chiefs to fork out thousands of pounds so they can move elsewhere.

This comes just weeks after Stobart Aviation, who own the airport, were forced to pay out compensation to nine homes due to the loss to growth in value to the properties.

June Carr, who lives on Wells Avenue, wants £100,000 from airport bosses so she and her husband can move out of their three-bedroom home. She said: “It’s unfair, we’re the closest to the runway.

“I’d be lucky if we got £300,000 for it now, it’s worth over £400,000.


“To work for 30 years on the house and to lose so much money is heartbreaking.

“We can’t sit in the garden because of the noise and pollution. We don’t let our grandkids in the garden because of it.”

The highest figure paid out by the airport was £17,000 to a home on Stambridge Avenue.

As part of the court ruling, nine homes on nine different roads will all be paid out between £4,000 and £17,000.

While Mark Harkins, who lives on Stambridge Avenue, also missed out on compensation.

He added: “They keep telling us the planes are so big because they’re really close.

“It’s like banging your head against a brick wall.

“The airport will really impact on us being able to sell the house. Whenever a plane goes over the garden you have to stop talking, it’s impossible to hear anything.”

Southend Airport insists it “engages with residents” so that “we can all enjoy a sustainable future founded on responsible airport operations.”

A spokesman from Southend Airport, said: “In 2012 London Southend Airport extended its runway and a number of residents sought compensation claiming the extension of the runway caused a reduction in their residential property values.

“Residents of Wells Avenue were in a position to submit claims at that time and were amongst the properties that submitted claims. Further claims are now time barred arising from the 2012 runway extension.

“Unfortunately, it was not possible to agree a figure for the compensation in view of the wide differences in amounts claimed.”