Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 6000562

Public case and site metadata stored from the official casework database, including fields that were empty in the source release.

A clearer next step

See how Inspectors approached issues like yours

Bring your planning decision into a private workspace. We separate the disputed points, then match them with source-located Inspector reasoning from similar appeals.

  • See which issues the decision appears to turn on
  • Compare the facts and open the full appeal records

One private comparison

How the refusal review works

One-off service · No subscription

Similar appeals are evidence to inspect, not a prediction of your outcome.

Official decision document

The decision, section by section

6 sections

Read the development description and the Inspector’s text from the official decision PDF in source order. Source headings are retained where available. Personal and contact details are removed by an automated privacy filter; this is source material, not Rules for You analysis.

Section 01

Development description

‘Loft conversion, creating two beds and a WC. Pergola at rear Ground floor’.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for ‘Loft conversion, creating two beds and a WC. Pergola at rear Ground floor’ at [site address] [site address] , Romford [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref P0650.25, subject to the following conditions.

    The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers: Proposed Block Plan - 201 [name]; [name] – 202 [name]; [name] and [name] 203 - [name]; [name] and [name] – 204 [name]; [name] and [name] – 205 [name]; [name] - 206 [name]; Proposed 3D [name] and Rear - 207 [name].

    The external materials of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing dwelling.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and local area.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The appeal site includes a two-storey terraced dwelling with a rear garden. I understand the property was originally semi-detached which was extended to the side and then separated from the former host building. The proposal includes a dormer roof extension to facilitate a loft conversion as well as a pergola to the rear and a rooflight to the front pitch. The Council does not take issue with the latter two elements, and I see no reason to disagree. As such, I will focus my assessment on the roof extension.

    My attention is drawn to the Council’s ‘[name] and Alterations’ Supplementary Planning Document (the SPD), although the Council has not provided a copy. This evidently advises that dormers should be contained well within the body of the roof by being set well back from the eaves and by setting the sides well in from any gables or party walls.

    The dormer would have a set down from the host ridge, particularly as it is stepped at the chimney, as well as being set in from either side and back from the eaves. The SPD does not elaborate on what ‘well within’ means in practice, but to my mind while the dormer is relatively large, it would not overwhelm the host roof. While the Council refers to symmetry between the semis, the host and adjoining properties are now part of a terrace and the converted dwelling to the side includes a two-storey rear outrigger shared with the host property. As such, this has already changed the host roofscape while I also observed other outriggers and dormers to the rear of adjacent dwellings. Moreover, this would only be discernible from the rear of other properties which would be read as part of the varied local roofscape.

    Taken together, the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the host property or local area. This would accord with policy 26 of the Havering Local Plan 2016 – 2031 (adopted November 2021) which seeks to ensure development proposals are informed by and respect the distinctive qualities, character and features of the site and local area. The proposal would also accord with the advice in the SPD.

  4. Section 05

    Conditions

    There are no suggested conditions before me. For the avoidance of doubt, I have imposed the standard time commencement, approved plans and matching materials conditions to ensure clarity for all concerned and ensure the character and appearance of the host dwelling and local area is protected.

  5. Section 06

    Conclusion

    The proposal would accord with the development plan taken as a whole and advice in the SPD. As such, the appeal is allowed subject to the conditions given.

Planning inspector and document dates

The official casework attribution is grouped under a one-way keyed hash and shown only by its local identifier. Decision-letter dates and page references are extracted by fixed first-page rules and checked against that authoritative record.

  • Appeal Decision

    Extracted inspector · page 1
    Inspector attribution ID 550No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    22 December 2025Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    9 December 2025 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
6000562
Application reference
P0650.25
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
London Borough of Havering
Planning authority code
E09000016

Casework details

The casework, procedure, development and linking details supplied by the official record.

Casework type
Householder (HAS)
Procedure
Written Representations
Development type
Householder developments
Appeal type reason
Not recorded
Appeal reason
refused
Type detail
Planning Appeals - Full
Jurisdiction
No Jurisdiction Associated
Link status
Not recorded

Site and development

Published appeal-site measurements and planning designations, without the withheld precise location fields.

Site area
0 hectares
Floor space
15 m²
Number of residences
Not recorded
Site in Green Belt
No
Agricultural holding
Not recorded
Affects setting of a listed building
Yes
Historic building grant made
Not recorded
Relates to a conservation area
Not recorded
Flooding is an issue
Not recorded
Site within an AONB
Not recorded
Site within an SSSI
Not recorded

Decision and dates

The published outcome and every imported case date.

Official decision
Allowed
Decision category
Allowed
Received date
20 August 2025
Valid date
20 August 2025
Start date
2 September 2025
Planning authority decision date
7 July 2025
Appeal decision date
22 December 2025

Case administration

Published recovery, call-in, costs and enforcement information for this case.

Redetermined
Not recorded
Bespoke
Not recorded
Date recovered
Not recorded
Date not recovered or derecovered
Not recorded
Call-in date
Not recorded
Costs applied for
No
Enforcement grounds count
Not recorded
Enforcement grounds
Not recorded

Source and catalogue history

When this record appeared in the rolling official release and when the catalogue stored it.

Source
Planning Inspectorate casework database
Source data system
Back Office
Dataset status
Current release
Catalogue record ID
82072
First seen
20 August 2026 at 14:25
Last seen
20 August 2026 at 16:29
Removed from release
Not recorded
Record created
20 August 2026 at 14:25
Record updated
24 August 2026 at 16:21