Another Consultation Part 4

Published: 25 April 2024

Topics: Appeals | Legislation

Written by Liz Fitzgerald

Liz Fitzgerald | Managing Director Liz has many years’ experience in Local Government as well as private practice. She has extremely wide-ranging knowledge of planning law and procedure, and is an experienced professional witness at Hearings, Public Inquiries, Development Plan Examinations and Judicial Review processes.

Essential reading for anyone interested in planning – Liz explores the proposed simplified process for Written Reps Appeals in this final part of her review of the Government’s latest consultation.

What’s it about

This element of the consultation seeks to expand the current Householder and Commercial Appeals Service to appeals relating to the following:

  • Refusal of planning permission or reserved matters.
  • Refusal of listed building consent.
  • Refusal of works to protected trees
  • Refusal of a Lawful Development Certificate.
  • Refusal of a s73 application.
  • Refusal of a condition discharge application.
  • Matters associated with the imposition of conditions on approvals.
  • Refusal of s106a applications.
  • Refusal of High Hedge applications
  • Refusal of consent under the Hedgerow Regulations.

The Government sees this as an opportunity to streamline and speed up the appeal process of these submissions, while reducing the pressure on Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to provide appeal statements or final comments.

Will it achieve these benefits?

The idea of speedier appeals is attractive, but it comes at the cost of being unable to submit any amendments to the scheme. 

With the removal of the ‘free go’ options, Appellants would face additional costs in trying to resolve minor matters that would now be excluded from the appeal process. Only fundamental points would remain to be dealt with via an appeal.

In essence, an expansion of the fast track appeal services would push decision making to the local level, by removing the ability to submit amendments with any appeal dealt with at this level. 

This approach ignores two facts. Firstly, in many instances appeals are made as key matters are unresolvable. Secondly having the ability to address other matters with the submission of the appeal enables more timely decision making.

The likely outcome

It is highly likely that this proposal will increase the number of appeals made that request a hearing or an inquiry over the written reps process, just to enable multiple issues to be addressed in one appeal submission.  This will increase the demands on the LPA and potentially create further delays in appeals being heard.

The consultation closes on the 1 May.  It remains to be seen if any of the changes proposed come into effect before the General Election, or if they will be shelved.