Invalid applications and challenging a local list item
A local validation requirement only bites if it is proportionate, relates to a material consideration and was published within the preceding two years. Here is how to test each limb.
When a planning application is returned as invalid because of a local list item, the first question to ask is whether that requirement meets the test in Article 11 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015. A local requirement only bites if it is reasonable having regard to the nature and scale of the proposal, if it relates to a matter that is reasonable to think will be a material consideration, and if it was published on the authority's website within the two years ending on the date the application was made. Fail any of those and the authority is asking for something it cannot insist on.
That does not make the fight worth having every time. It does mean you should know when you are being asked for a survey the local list cannot support.
How validation works and who decides
Validation is an administrative act carried out by a support team, not a planning judgement by a case officer. Someone checks the application against the national requirements and the authority's own published list, and either registers it or writes back asking for more.
Section 327A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 is the reason the process has teeth. It prohibits a local planning authority from entertaining an application that does not comply with the applicable requirements. The authority is not being obstructive when it refuses to register an incomplete submission, because it has no power to do otherwise.
The consequence is that the eight or thirteen week clock does not start. Nothing else happens until the file is registered, which is why a validation dispute that drifts for five weeks costs more than the survey ever would have.
The national information requirements
The national list is short and non-negotiable. A completed application form, the correct fee, a location plan and site plan, the ownership certificate and agricultural holdings declaration under section 65 of the 1990 Act, and a Design and Access Statement where Article 9 of the 2015 Order requires one.
Two of these catch out experienced agents. The ownership certificate has to be the right one of certificates A to D, served and dated correctly where anyone other than the applicant owns part of the site. And the fee has to be the fee in the current regulations, which are indexed, so a figure carried over from last year's spreadsheet will be short. How the fee schedule is applied and indexed covers the calculation.
A Design and Access Statement is required for major development and for certain development in a conservation area or World Heritage Site. Outside those cases it is a local requirement rather than a national one, which matters when you are arguing about whether it can be insisted upon.
Local list items and the reasonableness test
Local lists run from the sensible to the indefensible. The sensible ones mirror a policy in the adopted plan: a drainage strategy in a critical drainage area, a tree survey where there are trees on or adjacent to the site, a heritage statement where the site affects a designated asset.
The indefensible ones ask every applicant for the same bundle regardless of scale. A full Transport Assessment for a three unit scheme on an existing access. A protected species survey on a site that is entirely hardstanding. An energy statement for a change of use with no new floorspace.
Article 11 gives you three separate hooks:
- Proportionality to the nature and scale of the proposal.
- A connection to something that will be a material consideration in practice in the determination.
- Publication within the preceding two years.
The third is the cleanest argument and the one most often won, because authorities update validation lists infrequently and the date of publication is a matter of record. Ask for the publication date in writing.
The two year publication rule
The requirement is not that the document exists. It is that the information requirement was published, in the sense of being available on the authority's website, within two years ending on the date the application was made.
Where a council's local list is dated four years ago and has not been republished, a requirement in it that goes beyond the national list is open to challenge. Where the council republished the same list eighteen months ago, the clock has reset and the argument is gone.
Check this before you write anything else. It takes ten minutes and it decides the whole exchange.
Responding to a validation refusal
Write once, properly, and address each requested item separately rather than in a general complaint. For each item, state which of the three Article 11 limbs you say it fails, and what you are providing instead.
A workable structure runs: the item requested, the authority's stated reason, the Article 11 point, the proportionate alternative, and a request to register the application. Where a scoped-down document would actually answer the officer's concern, offer it. A two page drainage note that references the surface water map and the proposed discharge arrangement often disposes of a request for a full strategy on a minor application.
Keep the tone flat. The person reading it validates applications all day and has no stake in the policy argument.
Escalating within the authority
If the support team holds its position, escalate to the development management team leader rather than the case officer, and ask for the decision to be reviewed against the published list and Article 11. Name the list, its publication date and the specific requirement.
Two things help. A short chronology showing how long the application has been unregistered. And a note of what has already been submitted, so the reviewer is not re-reading the whole file. The same approach works when a consultee response is holding things up, as clearing a statutory consultee holding objection sets out.
There is no statutory appeal against a validation decision. Judicial review exists in principle and is almost never proportionate for a householder or minor application.
When to submit under protest
The practical route, where the dispute is about a local list item and the authority will not move, is to provide what is asked while recording that you do so without accepting the requirement. That preserves the position for a later fee refund argument and keeps the programme moving.
The alternative is to insist the application was valid when submitted, let the statutory period run from that date and appeal against non-determination. It is a real option for a well advised applicant with a strong Article 11 point and a scheme that can absorb the delay. It is a poor option where the missing item is on the national list, because then the authority is right and the appeal will be dismissed on validity.
An illustrative example
A planning consultant submits a full application for four dwellings on a brownfield infill site. The council asks for a Transport Assessment, citing a local list threshold expressed in its 2019 validation document, which has not been republished. The consultant supplies a two page transport note with trip generation from a published database, states that the Transport Assessment requirement fails the two year publication test and the proportionality test, and asks for registration. The council registers the application and the case officer raises no transport objection. This example is illustrative and not a prediction about any authority.
Where the dispute is really about the planning merits rather than the paperwork, a well argued Planning Statement does more good than a validation argument, and it is worth checking whether amending the description of development removes the trigger altogether.
This is general guidance, not legal advice. Check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it.
PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval. Browse all 66 report types on PlanScope to see what a validation list is likely to ask for.
Frequently asked questions
Can I appeal against a decision that my application is invalid?
There is no statutory appeal against a validation decision. Your options are to supply the information, escalate internally to the development management team leader, submit under protest, or maintain that the application was valid when made and appeal against non-determination once the statutory period expires. Judicial review exists but is rarely proportionate.
What is the two year rule on local validation lists?
Article 11 of the Development Management Procedure Order 2015 requires a local information requirement to have been published on the authority's website within the two years ending on the date the application was made. If the list predates that window and has not been republished, the requirement cannot be insisted upon.
Does the eight week period start before validation?
No. The determination period runs from the date the application is valid, not the date it was submitted. That is why an unresolved validation dispute is expensive: the clock has not started, no case officer has been allocated, and consultation has not begun. Resolve it in days rather than weeks.
Is a Design and Access Statement a national requirement?
Only for major development and for certain development in a conservation area or World Heritage Site, under Article 9 of the 2015 Order. Elsewhere it is a local requirement, which means it has to pass the Article 11 tests like any other local list item. Many authorities ask for one regardless.
What should I write when a local list item is disproportionate?
Take each requested item in turn. State the item, the reason given, which Article 11 limb you say it fails, and what you are providing instead. Offer a scoped alternative where one would answer the concern. Ask for the publication date of the list in the same letter.
Sources and further reading
This article is general guidance about the planning system in England and, where stated, the rest of the UK. It is not legal or professional advice. Check your local planning authority’s validation requirements and take professional advice for your specific site.