172,296 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.

Dismissed

Appeal Dismissed — the UK

DC/25/3438/LBC

27 Sun Lane, IP12 1EG

The planning appeal decision letter addresses two appeals by Mr. and Mrs. Rapley concerning proposed works at 27 Sun Lane, Woodbridge, Suffolk, which were refused by East Suffolk Council. The appeals involve a request for listed building consent (Appeal A) and planning permission (Appeal B) for a new rear dormer and green roof to replace an existing flat roof. The main issues identified by the Inspector were whether the proposal would preserve the significance of the Grade II listed building and its setting, as well as the character of the Woodbridge Conservation Area. For Appeal B, the impact on the living conditions of neighboring occupants was also considered. The Inspector concluded that the proposed dormer would disrupt the traditional roofline of the terrace, eroding the architectural integrity of the listed building and negatively impacting the setting of adjacent listed properties. Despite the use of high-quality materials, the design was deemed incongruous and harmful to the historic character of the area. While the proposal would not significantly affect the living conditions of nearby residents, it failed to meet the requirements for preserving the historic environment. Ultimately, both appeals were dismissed. The Inspector emphasized that the limited public benefits of the proposal did not outweigh the considerable harm to the heritage assets, thus conflicting with national policies and local planning regulations aimed at protecting historic environments.

Dismissed

Appeal Dismissed — the UK

DC/25/3437/FUL

27 Sun Lane, IP12 1EG

The planning appeal decision letter concerns two appeals by Mr. and Mrs. Rapley regarding their proposals for a new rear dormer and green roof at 27 Sun Lane, Woodbridge, Suffolk. The appeals were made against the refusal of listed building consent and planning permission by East Suffolk Council. The main issues identified by the Inspector were whether the proposals would preserve the significance of the Grade II listed building and its setting, as well as the character of the Woodbridge Conservation Area. For Appeal B, the impact on the living conditions of neighboring occupiers was also considered. The Inspector emphasized the importance of preserving the architectural integrity of the listed building and its terrace, noting that the proposed dormer would disrupt the traditional roofline and result in the loss of historic brickwork. Although some nearby properties had dormers, the Inspector concluded that the proposal would harm the listed building and the wider terrace's significance, thereby detracting from the conservation area's historic environment. While the Inspector acknowledged that the proposal would not adversely affect the living conditions of neighboring residents, the overall harm to the historic environment was deemed significant. The limited public benefits, such as improved usability of a bedroom and minor economic advantages, were not sufficient to outweigh the considerable harm identified. Ultimately, both appeals were dismissed, with the Inspector concluding that the proposals conflicted with national policies aimed at protecting the historic environment and local planning policies designed to enhance it.

Allowed

Appeal Allowed — the UK

PL/25/3058/FA

114 Totteridge Road, HP13 6EX

The appeal decision concerns the proposed conversion and extension of the former RAF Association Club at 114 Totteridge Road, High Wycombe, into six residential flats. The main issues addressed by the Inspector were the principle of residential development given the site's former use and its designation as an asset of community value, the living conditions for future occupants and neighboring properties, and the adequacy of on-site parking. The Inspector determined that the site, located within the High Wycombe settlement boundary, was suitable for residential development, as the former club primarily served a limited membership rather than the wider community. The evidence indicated that the loss of the club would not negatively impact local access to community facilities, thus supporting the proposal's principle. Regarding living conditions, the proposal was found to meet the Nationally Described Space Standards, providing adequate internal space and amenity areas for future residents. Potential privacy concerns due to overlooking were acknowledged, but the Inspector concluded that these could be mitigated through obscure glazing and appropriate conditions. The design was deemed acceptable, with limited impact on the outlook from neighboring properties. Ultimately, the appeal was allowed, granting planning permission for the proposed development, subject to conditions to ensure compliance with privacy and design standards. An application for costs made by the appellant against the Council was noted to be under separate consideration.

Dismissed

Appeal Dismissed — Pinner

PL/0336/26/PRIOR

Thrale Farm, Pinner, HA3 6SX

The appeal decision concerns a proposed barn at Thrale Farm, London, intended for hay and machinery storage. The London Borough of Harrow refused the application, leading to an appeal by Mr. Jack Russell. The Inspector's main issues revolved around whether the development qualified as permitted under the General Permitted Development Order (GPDO), specifically regarding the agricultural use of the land, the necessity of the building, the ground area covered, and excavation extent. The Inspector found that while the site is classified as agricultural land, there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that it was actively used for trade or business purposes, which is a requirement under the GPDO. The appellant provided some documentation, including a letter from DEFRA and an invoice for hay sales, but these did not convincingly establish ongoing commercial activity. Additionally, the Inspector concluded that the proposed building's size was excessive relative to the agricultural needs of the unit, lacking adequate justification for its necessity. While the proposed building's footprint did not exceed the 1,500 square meters limit, the Inspector determined that the proposal did not meet the GPDO's criteria for permitted development due to the lack of evidence for agricultural use and the building's necessity. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the Inspector did not find grounds for costs against the Council, as the appellant failed to demonstrate compliance with the GPDO requirements.

Dismissed

Appeal Dismissed — Berkhamsted

24/02705/MOA

Bulbourne Wood, Berkhamsted, HP4 1LN

The appeal decision letter concerns the refusal of outline planning permission by Dacorum Borough Council for the construction of a nursing home with up to 67 bedrooms for dementia care at Bulbourne Wood, Northchurch, Berkhamsted. The main issues addressed by the Inspector included whether the proposed development constituted inappropriate development in the Green Belt, its impact on the openness of the Green Belt, effects on protected woodlands and the Chilterns National Landscape, implications for local biodiversity, and the adequacy of sustainable transport provisions. The Inspector noted that while there is a recognized need for nursing home spaces, the site’s location raised significant concerns regarding transport accessibility and potential parking issues. The proposed facility would likely generate substantial traffic, including staff and service vehicles, which could lead to congestion on New Road due to insufficient parking provision. The Inspector highlighted that the site is not ideally situated for sustainable transport options, with limited public transport services and inadequate pedestrian infrastructure. Ultimately, the Inspector concluded that the development would be inappropriate in the Green Belt, failing to meet the necessary criteria to justify such development. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed on 26 October 2026, with no conditions attached as the application was not granted. The decision emphasized the importance of protecting the Green Belt and ensuring that any development aligns with sustainable transport principles.

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 — September 2026

The latest features and improvements shipped to Claw.

Cancel & Resume Your Plan

New

Cancel your subscription right from your account — you keep full access until the end of your paid term, it won’t auto-renew, and you can resume in one click if you change your mind.

Up-to-Date Appeal Decisions

Improvement

New Planning Inspectorate (England) decisions are captured and kept current automatically, with decision letters restored across recent appeals.

Smoother Appeal Viewer

Improvement

The decision viewer now closes reliably and shows a clear message when a decision letter isn’t available yet, instead of hanging.

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.