Changes to the written representation appeals procedure: tips for planning applicants

In this briefing, associate Hebe Robinson outlines the changes to the written representation process for appeals and the key points for applicants to be aware of.

Planning appeals can be decided by consideration of written representations, a hearing or a full inquiry. The method of appeal depends on the circumstances of the case.

Most planning appeals are decided by the written representation procedure, which involves a Planning Inspector considering the written evidence submitted by the appellant (i.e. the party appealing the decision), the Local Planning Authority, and any other interested parties. A site visit is usually undertaken. The Planning Inspector then issues their decision.

The new written representations procedure will apply to appeals relating to planning applications submitted on or after 1 April 2026 and make it the default mode for appeals. (Appeals relating to applications made on or before 31 March 2026 will follow the previous procedures.)

The scope of the written appeal process has been widened to include:

• planning appeals

• householder development appeals

• minor commercial appeals

• listed building appeals

• advertisement appeals

• discontinuance notice appeals

In submitting an appeal, under the new procedure an appellant can only submit a copy of their application, the Local Planning Authority’s Decision Notice, and a short statement responding to the decision and setting out why they disagree.

The important change is that, aside from providing a short statement, the appellant cannot submit fresh evidence or arguments that were not already submitted to the Local Planning Authority at the application stage (this is a significant change from the previous regime). Third parties are also restricted in raising new issues at appeal. The historic approach, where appeals were used to “repair” weak applications or introduce stronger technical evidence, is no longer possible.

If the appellant believes that there has been a material change in circumstances (e.g. change in development plan policy or national policy, a court judgement or decision in another application or appeal) since the time that the Local Planning Authority made their decision, they can notify the Planning Inspectorate on the appeal form. It is then for the Planning Inspectorate to decide if more information is required and to request this from the parties.

If these are not handled correctly at submission:

• The Inspector may be legally constrained from considering improved material later

• The appeal may fail even where the development is substantively acceptable

The appeal is no longer a full “second bite of the cherry”.

The key factors which can contribute to refusal of planning applications include:

• Inadequate planning balance consideration (e.g. poor articulation of benefits vs harm)

• Unresolved technical issues (e.g. highways, viability, BNG, heritage)

• Missing or suboptimal planning obligations (e.g. s106 not ready or incorrectly framed)

• Failure to address policy conflicts properly at application stage

For straightforward, policy-compliant schemes it remains the case that legal input is rarely needed. However, under the new regime, the threshold for sensible legal involvement is materially lower, because:

• The cost of getting the application wrong has increased

• The ability to correct errors later has been reduced

As a result, a planning solicitor’s role would be focused on risk-proofing the application. Typical advice would include:

• A review to ensure that the planning case is structured correctly at submission

• Ensuring all legal and policy arguments are properly framed

• Drafting or reviewing s106 obligations

• Ensuring compliance with application requirements

• Aligning consultant evidence and ensuring consistency between planning statement, technical reports and drawings

• Positioning fallback arguments

The reforms fundamentally change the strategy, as the application is now the appeal.

If the case is not:

• complete

• evidenced

• legally coherent

At submission stage, the system may not allow you to fix it later. If you require support with planning applications in light of this change, our planning team has experience working on projects of all sizes across England and Wales and for a variety of clients, including property developers, charities and private individuals.