Received a Section 203 Rights of Light Letter From a Council Scheme? What It Means | Daylight Protect

eb7, Newmark Gerald Eve, Prism City and Consil have no connection with Daylight Protect. This is independent information for property owners who have received a rights of light letter from a council-led scheme. It has been prepared from a letter sent by eb7 in July 2026 on behalf of a London borough council, and from the public material of the firms mentioned, checked on 2 November 2026. The wording of your own letter may differ.

A rights of light letter that cites section 203 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 is a different animal from the usual developer's letter. The scheme is council-led, the council has appropriated the land for planning purposes, and the law has swapped your power to stop the building for a right to be paid. The number is still negotiable. The letter in your hand is the authority's opening move, written by the authority's consultant, and it is unusually candid about one thing: it expects you to have a surveyor.

• Section 203 removes the injunction, not the entitlement. Compensation under section 204 is a statutory right, measured by the loss in value of your property, and decided by the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) if it cannot be agreed.
• The offer to pay your surveyor's fees up to an agreed cap is worth taking. The cap is the other side's number and it defines the job, and the names in the letter were chosen by the council's consultant. You may appoint any suitably qualified rights of light surveyor.
• The 14 days is a timetable for an inspection, not a deadline on your claim. Take advice before you reply, then cooperate on sensible terms. Check your claim free of charge.

‍

What does a section 203 rights of light letter say?

The letter we reviewed was sent by eb7, a specialist rights of light consultancy, on behalf of a London borough council about a council-led residential scheme with a resolution to grant planning permission. In summary, it:

• says the council has appointed eb7 to assess whether the scheme will affect light to neighbouring properties, and that a preliminary assessment based on estimated room layouts suggests the recipient's property may be affected;
• asks for access within 14 days so a surveyor can check internal layouts and room sizes, after which eb7 would revise its analysis and share the results;
• says that if an impact is confirmed, eb7 would open discussions on the council's behalf, including on compensation;
• says the council has appropriated its land for planning purposes, so that section 203 converts any rights of light that might otherwise have impeded the scheme into a statutory right to compensation under section 204, based on provable loss and determined by the Upper Tribunal if not agreed;
• invites the recipient to appoint their own rights of light surveyor, says the council is willing to cover that surveyor's fees up to an agreed cap, and lists three surveyors as suggestions while stating there is no obligation to use them; and
• recommends independent legal advice before responding.

It came with a FAQ sheet confirming that access is voluntary, that there is no cost to the recipient, and that the visit is not a valuation or condition survey.

Most of that is accurate and, as these letters go, fair. What it does not explain is what section 203 does to the value of your claim, or why the authority is so willing to pay for your adviser. If eb7 has written to you about a private developer's scheme rather than a council one, our separate guide to a letter from eb7 applies instead.

‍

What is section 203, and what does it change?

Ordinarily a right to light is enforced in the courts, and the court's power to grant an injunction, stopping a scheme or ordering a completed building cut back, is what makes developers pay properly to release it. Section 203 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 allows a local authority, or a developer it has brought in, to carry out works on land the authority has acquired or appropriated for planning purposes even where those works interfere with a neighbour's easement, provided planning consent is in place and the works are for the purposes the land was appropriated for.

Your right is not extinguished. It is overridden, and replaced by a statutory right to compensation under section 204. In practice that means three things. You cannot stop the scheme. You cannot threaten to. And the dispute, if there is one, is about money, with the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) as the referee if the two sides cannot agree.

One check is worth making before you accept the premise. Section 203 only applies where its conditions are met: a genuine appropriation for planning purposes, a planning consent, and works that fall within it. The letter asserting the position is not the same as evidencing it. Ask for the date and terms of the council's appropriation resolution and keep the answer on file.

‍

How is compensation worked out under section 204?

Section 204 says compensation is calculated on the same basis as compensation under sections 7 and 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965. In plain terms, that is the reduction in the value of your property caused by the interference with your light. It is not a share of the developer's gain, and it is not the price a private developer pays to make an injunction risk go away. That is why the figures an authority's consultant opens with are often lower than the rights of light settlements you may have read about elsewhere, and why the letter describes the entitlement as "provable loss".

"Provable" is the operative word. Two things move the number. The first is the measured extent of the loss: which rooms, how much light before and after, assessed room by room on actual layouts using a recognised rights of light analysis such as the Waldram method. The second is the valuation evidence for what that loss does to the value of the property. The authority's consultant assesses both for the authority. An independent assessment, prepared for you, often finds more. Where the two sides cannot agree, the dispute can be referred to the Upper Tribunal, which decides the figure and has power to deal with the costs of the reference.

‍

Should I let eb7's surveyor in?

Yes, on advice and on terms. The authority's preliminary assessment rests on estimated layouts, and measured data replaces guesswork. Refusing access protects nothing, since section 203 has already removed the injunction, and a tribunal weighs the conduct of both sides. What you should do is treat the visit for what it is: a step in the authority's assessment of your loss, not advice to you. Ask for the full results once the analysis is updated, meaning the drawings, the room-by-room figures and the methodology, rather than a summary. Have your own surveyor review them, or attend. And say nothing during the visit about how long your windows have been there, what you think the scheme will do, or what you would accept.

‍

The council will pay for my surveyor. Should I use one of the names in the letter?

You can. A consultant acting for a developer or an authority suggesting neighbour-side surveyors is common practice in this field, and the three firms named in the letter we reviewed are established practices doing nothing improper by appearing on it. For the record, they were a partner at Newmark Gerald Eve, the director of Prism City Ltd, and an associate director at Consil Ltd, which the letter referred to as "Counsel UK". Three things are worth knowing before you appoint anyone, from that list or elsewhere.

1. The fee cap is the other side's number. "Up to an agreed cap" means a fee agreed between your surveyor and the council. It will typically cover an inspection, a review of the authority's analysis and a negotiation. Ask what happens if the matter needs more than that: a full independent rights of light analysis, valuation evidence, solicitors, or a reference to the Upper Tribunal. If the answer is that anything beyond the cap is at your cost, you now know where the cap really sits.
2. Ask who else they act for. Rights of light is a small specialism in which most practices act for developers as well as neighbours, and the firms listed describe their work in those terms in their own published material. That is normal, and it is not a criticism. It does mean you should ask any surveyor, directly and in writing, whether they act for the council, for eb7's clients, or for anyone else connected with this scheme, and whether they are prepared to take the matter to the Upper Tribunal if the authority's figure is wrong.
3. A surveyor is not the whole claim. A surveyor can measure, analyse and negotiate. A section 204 reference needs solicitors and usually counsel, with costs at stake on both sides. The authority's consultant can tell which neighbours are equipped to go that far, and the figures offered tend to reflect it.

Whoever you choose, get the council's confirmation in writing that the fee offer applies to the surveyor you have chosen, before they start work. We compare the ways a claim can be run, and who carries the risk in each, in claims company vs your own surveyor vs solicitor.

‍

Is there a deadline?

The 14 days in the letter is the consultant's timetable for arranging an inspection, not a time limit on your compensation. You do not need to send a substantive reply within it; an acknowledgement, and a request for the appropriation details and the full analysis in due course, is enough. Statutory compensation claims do carry limitation periods, and an authority's position hardens once the scheme is built and figures have been agreed with other neighbours, so get advice now and reply when you know your position rather than when their calendar says so.

‍

How can Daylight Protect help?

Daylight Protect handles section 203 compensation claims on a no win, no fee basis as part of our fully funded solution. A specialist rights of light surveyor measures and values your loss independently of the authority's consultant, specialist solicitors act for you, and counsel is instructed where a Tribunal reference needs it. Legal insurance included in the plan covers the other side's costs if the claim does not succeed. Our fee is a percentage of your compensation, paid only when you win, and everything is set out in writing before you start. If your claim is unsuccessful, you pay nothing. The council's letter tells you it expects you to be represented. This plan is what makes that representation cost you nothing, win or lose, and equips the claim to go to the Tribunal if the number is not right.

Find out what your claim is worth →

Daylight Protect is a litigation facilitator, not a firm of solicitors. We arrange and manage rights of light claims on a no win, no fee basis; legal work is carried out by independent specialist solicitors who act for you. Our fee is payable only if your claim succeeds.

‍

Frequently asked questions

Can I stop the scheme?

No. Where section 203 properly applies, the injunction is gone. The right to be compensated remains, and the amount is what the argument is about.

Does section 203 mean I will get less than a neighbour of a private scheme?

Often, yes. The measure is the loss in value of your property rather than the price a private developer would pay to remove an injunction risk. That makes the evidence of your loss, and the valuation of it, matter more, not less.

Do I have to use one of the surveyors eb7 suggested?

No, and the letter says so itself. You may appoint any suitably qualified rights of light surveyor, and the council's offer to meet reasonable fees up to a cap is not expressed as conditional on choosing from the list. Confirm that in writing before anyone starts work.

Is eb7 acting for me?

No. eb7 is appointed by the council, and its surveyor's visit is to inform the council's assessment. Nothing in that is improper, and nothing in it is advice to you.

I have already let them measure, or already replied. Have I lost anything?

No. Access and a courteous acknowledgement cost you nothing. What matters is not agreeing a figure, and not signing anything, before you have independent advice.

Will the Upper Tribunal actually get involved?

Only if the figure cannot be agreed. Most section 204 claims settle by negotiation. The Tribunal is the backstop that makes the negotiation real.

This article is general information about rights of light in England and Wales, not legal advice on your specific circumstances.

‍

This article was written by Joshua Platt BSc (Hons) MRICS, Director, Daylight Protect

Daylight Protect is a rights of light claims specialist operating across England and Wales. We provide a fully funded solution that covers everything end to end, the surveyor, the solicitor, counsel and court fees, backed by legal insurance that covers the developer's costs if a claim does not succeed. There is no recovery, no fee, and no costs to you either way. We tell you plainly when you have a claim, and just as plainly when you do not.

‍