164,923 planning appeals indexed

Find planning appeals in seconds

The UK's most comprehensive planning appeal search engine. Search, filter, and analyse appeal decisions with AI-powered insights — built for planning professionals.

No credit card required. 14-day free trial.

The UK's Most Comprehensive Planning Appeal Database

0
Planning Appeals
0+
Local Authorities
0+
Unique Appellants
0%
Appeals Allowed
0
Decision Documents

Latest appeal decisions

The most recent planning appeals, summarised by AI.

Referred

Appeal Referredthe UK

APP/A5270/C/26/3377789

44 Hill Rise, UB6 8PB

The appeal decision concerns an enforcement notice issued by the London Borough of Ealing against J & J Transport Limited for unauthorized developments at 44 Hill Rise, Greenford. The alleged breaches included the removal of front bay windows, the erection of a two-storey front extension, a part single-storey/part two-storey rear/side extension, alterations to the roof, and a material change of use to eight self-contained flats. The Inspector's main issues were the impact of the operational development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the surrounding area, as well as the effect of the change of use on living conditions. The appellant argued that previous planning permission (ref. 215758FUL) authorized the works, but the Inspector found that the completed development differed materially from the approved scheme, thus constituting unauthorized development. The Inspector allowed the appeal in part, granting planning permission for some structural changes while varying the enforcement notice to remove the requirement to cease the use of the property as eight flats. However, the appeal was dismissed regarding the material change of use, as no permission had been granted for the use of the property as eight self-contained flats, which was deemed a separate development requiring its own planning permission. In conclusion, the Inspector upheld the enforcement notice with modifications, requiring compliance within six months, while recognizing the development's contribution to the character of the area despite its non-compliance with space standards and planning regulations.

Part Allowed

Appeal Part Allowedthe UK

APP/J2373/C/24/3348067

51 Charnley Road, FY1 4PE

The appeal decision concerns an enforcement notice issued by Blackpool Borough Council against Constabley Investments Limited for the unauthorized change of use of 51 Charnley Road from a guest house to a self-contained holiday let. The main issues addressed were whether the current use constituted a breach of planning control and whether the use fell within Class C1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987. The appellant argued that the property had been used as a guest house since 1979, asserting that no material change had occurred. However, the Inspector found that the current use did not align with the characteristics of a Class C1 use, which typically includes the provision of meals and some level of service. The Inspector noted that the absence of significant services, such as prepared meals and on-site management, indicated that the property operated more as a self-catering holiday let, which is classified as sui generis. The Inspector dismissed the appeal, upheld the enforcement notice, and refused planning permission for the change of use. The decision emphasized that the lack of typical guest house services and the unrestricted access to the entire property by guests were critical factors in determining that a material change of use had occurred. The compliance period for the enforcement notice remains set at one month.

Part Allowed

Appeal Part Allowedthe UK

APP/N1920/C/25/3372752

15 Oddesey Road, WD6 5HZ

The appeal decision concerns a breach of planning control at 15 Oddesey Road, Borehamwood, where Hunslow Estates Ltd contested an enforcement notice issued by Hertsmere Borough Council for unauthorized changes in use from a single-family dwelling to a mixed-use comprising one self-contained flat and a seven-bedroom House in Multiple Occupation (HMO). The Inspector, Stephen Hawkins, conducted a site visit on June 23, 2026, and issued the decision on July 22, 2026. The main issues revolved around the nature of the alleged breach and whether the premises constituted a single large HMO or two smaller HMOs alongside a flat. The Inspector found that the premises were indeed used as two small HMOs and a flat, leading to a material change of use requiring planning permission. The enforcement notice was corrected to reflect this finding, changing the alleged use from a seven-bedroom HMO to a three-bedroom and a four-bedroom small HMO. The Inspector reasoned that the physical and functional separation of the units indicated they operated independently, thus justifying the correction. However, the appeal on grounds (b) and (c) failed as the appellant could not demonstrate that the mixed use did not constitute a breach of planning control. The Inspector noted that substantial alterations would have been necessary to convert the permitted flats into the current configuration, casting doubt on the appellant's claim of substantial completion under the previous planning permission. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, and the enforcement notice was upheld with the specified corrections, requiring compliance within nine months.

Dismissed

Appeal DismissedEdinburgh

ENA-230-2458

Flat 21, Edinburgh, EH7 6FE

The appeal decision regarding the enforcement notice served by the City of Edinburgh Council concerns the alleged unauthorized change of use of a flat from a residential dwelling to a short-term let. The main issues addressed were whether the use constituted a breach of planning control and the reasonableness of the compliance period stipulated in the notice. The appellant, Mr. Gauthier Autrand, argued that the property remained his principal residence and that the enforcement notice was unwarranted. However, the Reporter found that the evidence presented by the council, including the property’s advertisement on platforms like Airbnb and the frequency of guest turnover, indicated a material change of use that required planning permission. The Reporter concluded that the short-term letting had become a primary use of the property, significantly differing from typical residential use and likely causing noise disturbances to neighbors. On the second issue regarding the compliance period, the appellant requested an extension from one month to twelve months due to personal health concerns and existing guest bookings. The Reporter sided with the council, stating that one month was a reasonable timeframe, considering the breach and the potential for further negative impacts on neighboring amenity. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, and the enforcement notice upheld, with the compliance period set at one month. The decision takes effect immediately, barring any application to the Court of Session.

Part Allowed

Appeal Part AllowedDevon

APP/Q1153/C/26/3377842

Land at SX369802, Known as Rose Cottage, Devon, PL15 9PD

The appeal decision concerns an enforcement notice issued by West Devon Borough Council against Mr. Lawrence Grose regarding the alleged unauthorized change of use of a detached garage at Rose Cottage into a separate dwelling. The notice required the cessation of this residential use and the removal of associated fixtures and fittings, allowing 18 months for compliance. The main issues addressed by the Inspector were whether there had been a material change of use and if the enforcement action was justified. The appellant argued that the change of use began in February 2021, while the Council contended it started in May 2022. The Inspector noted that the notice initially lacked clarity as it did not specify a "material" change of use, which was corrected to align with legal definitions. The Inspector found that while the garage could function as a dwelling, the evidence did not sufficiently prove that it had been used as such continuously for the required period before the enforcement notice was issued. The appellant's claims about the garage's prior use were not substantiated with adequate evidence, such as photographs or witness testimonies. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, and the enforcement notice was upheld with corrections. The Inspector concluded that the requirements of the notice were appropriate and necessary to remedy the breach without infringing on the appellant's rights to revert to any lawful use that existed prior to the alleged breach. The decision emphasizes the importance of clear evidence in establishing the continuity of use for enforcement purposes.

Everything you need for appeal research

Stop spending hours trawling through the Planning Inspectorate website. Find the precedents you need in seconds.

Powerful Search

Full-text search with advanced filtering by decision type, local authority, date range, and more.

Comprehensive Database

Over 350,000 planning appeal decisions from the Planning Inspectorate, fully indexed and searchable.

PDF Document Access

View original appeal decision letters and documents directly in the browser.

Save & Bookmark

Bookmark appeals for later reference and build your own library of relevant decisions.

Team Collaboration

Invite team members, share bookmarks, and collaborate on appeal research together.

AI-Powered Insights

Chat with appeal documents using AI. Ask questions and get instant answers from any decision letter.

What's New — July 2026

The latest features and improvements shipped to Claw.

AI Assistant Connector (Claude & ChatGPT)

New

Connect Claw to Claude or ChatGPT and search planning appeals conversationally — read decisions, check citations, and pull case details right inside your assistant.

Full-Text Decision Search

New

Search now finds cases by any wording inside the decision letter itself — not just the address, metadata, or AI summary.

Highlighted Search Matches

New

Results now show the exact passage from the decision that matched your search, highlighted in context.

Trusted by planning professionals

See what our users are saying about Claw.

We've recently started using Claw, an app designed to help find appeal decisions and have been really impressed by it. It has a load of useful features with search filters that allow you to search by constraints, authorities and type of appeal to find relevant appeal decisions easily and quickly. We'd highly recommend this app!
PlanIt Consulting

Planning Consultancy

The Eden team is always looking for ways to efficiently clear and pragmatic planning solutions for our clients and using CLAW enables us to do this.
Eden Planning & Development Ltd

Planning & Development Consultancy

It's a great app!

Peter

Planning Professional

We love Claw!

Olivia

Planning Professional

Hear hear, great app!

Caroline

Planning Professional

It's a game changer!

Mark

Planning Professional

Simple, transparent pricing

Start with a 14-day free trial. No credit card required.

Standard

For planning professionals

£495/yr

£41.25/mo — save £93/yr

  • Unlimited search queries
  • Full planning appeal database access
  • PDF document viewing
  • Save searches and bookmarks
  • Team collaboration (up to 5 members)
  • AI Chat with Appeals
Most Popular

Premium

For power users who need AI assistance

£595/yr

£49.58/mo — save £113/yr

  • Everything in Standard
  • AI Chat with Appeals
  • Ask questions about any appeal document
  • Get instant AI-powered insights
  • Priority support

Cancel anytime. All plans include a 14-day money-back guarantee.

Lisa Rasch, Founder of Claw

Lisa Rasch MRTPI

Founder, Claw App | Director, Freedom Planning and Design

A practicing planning consultant and the founder of CLAW — a planning appeals intelligence platform transforming how planners, consultants and local planning authorities engage with appeal data.

With a 100% success rate across her consultancy work, Lisa is trusted by homeowners, developers, architects and local authorities for her clarity, integrity and expertise. As a woman leading a fast-growing PlanTech company in a traditionally male-dominated sector, she brings together deep professional experience, commercial insight and a genuine drive to bridge the gap between policy, practice and technology.

Named one of The Planner's Women of Influence three years running.

The Planner's Women of Influence 2026

Frequently asked questions

Everything you need to know about searching planning appeals with Claw.

Book a demo

Want to see Claw in action? Schedule a personalised demo with our team.