Non-material amendments: what section 96A will and will not fix
A non-material amendment is decided in 28 days for a low flat fee, but carries no right of appeal and a statutory cumulative test. Here is where the saving stops and section 73 takes over.
A section 96A application is the lowest-cost way to change a planning permission and the easiest to overuse. It lets a local planning authority make a non-material change to an existing permission, decided in 28 days, with a fee far below that of a full application. It also has no right of appeal, no statutory publicity, and a statutory test that gets harder every time you use it on the same permission.
Architects reach for it when a client value-engineers a window detail three weeks before the contractor starts. Sometimes that is exactly right. Sometimes it burns a fortnight and ends with a section 73 application anyway.
The power and its limits
Section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 allows an authority to make a change to a permission it has granted, provided the change is not material. The application can be made by anyone with an interest in the land, and the authority may impose new conditions, remove conditions or alter existing ones as part of the change.
Three limits matter. The amendment cannot extend the life of the permission, so a scheme running out of time needs a fresh application rather than a tidy amendment. The amendment cannot change the description of development on the decision notice. And there is no appeal against a refusal, which means a refused application leaves you where you started, several weeks later.
The permission itself survives. A section 96A decision amends the original grant rather than replacing it, which is why the original decision notice, the amendment notice and the amended drawing list all have to travel together for the rest of the scheme's life.
How authorities judge materiality
There is no statutory definition of "non-material", and that is deliberate. The judgement is one of fact and degree, made in the context of the particular permission and the particular site.
In practice, officers ask a short set of questions. Would the change alter the appearance of the development as seen from outside the site? Would it affect a neighbour's daylight, outlook or privacy? Would it change anything a consultee relied on when they responded, such as a drainage design or a visibility splay? Would it conflict with a condition or a section 106 obligation? Would a reasonable person who objected to the original application feel the scheme had moved?
A 100 mm change in ridge height on a rear extension tucked behind a boundary wall is one thing. The same 100 mm on a building that scraped past a daylight objection is another. Context does the work.
Some changes are almost always accepted: internal layout alterations that do not change the external envelope, correcting a drawing error, adding a drawing reference that was omitted from the condition, minor repositioning of a flue on a rear elevation. Some are almost never: additional floorspace, new openings on a boundary elevation, changes to approved landscaping in a conservation area, anything touching a heritage asset's setting.
Fees, timescales and the missing appeal
The fee for a non-material amendment is set by the fee regulations at a low flat rate, with a lower figure for changes to householder permissions and a higher one for everything else. Those figures are indexed each April, so check the current schedule on the Planning Portal before you quote a client. If you are assembling a wider budget, the same regulations drive the sliding scale that applies to a new dwelling application.
The determination period is 28 days from receipt of a valid application, and authorities cannot agree an extension of time in the way they can on a full application. Where the 28 days pass without a decision, the application is not deemed approved. Nothing happens. You chase.
No appeal means no fallback. That single fact should shape how you use the route: apply for changes you are confident about, and do not treat a section 96A as a low-cost test of whether something is acceptable.
Amendments that get refused
The pattern behind most refusals is that the change would have attracted an objection if it had been in the original application. Officers are protecting the integrity of a decision that was publicised, consulted on and, in some cases, taken to committee.
The recurring refusals:
- Increases in floorspace, however small, particularly where the levy or an affordable housing threshold is in play
- New or enlarged windows facing a neighbouring property
- Changes to materials on a principal elevation in a conservation area
- Alterations to an access, visibility splay or parking layout the highway authority commented on
- Removal of a landscaping or tree protection element secured by condition
- Anything the case officer would have to reconsult a statutory consultee about
Floorspace deserves its own note. Where a scheme is liable for the Community Infrastructure Levy, an amendment that changes floorspace cuts across the calculation that was already made, and authorities are alert to it. The mechanics of how a levy charge is calculated explain why a small area change is not a small administrative matter.
Cumulative change and the trap it sets
Section 96A(2) requires the authority, when deciding whether a change is material, to consider the effect of that change together with any previous changes made under the same section. The test is cumulative by statute, not by local preference.
This is the trap. Four amendments, each unarguably minor on its own, can produce a building that no longer matches the one that was approved. The fifth application is then refused on the whole, and the applicant is left arguing that the first four were fine, which is true and irrelevant.
Keep a running schedule of amendments against each permission, with dates, reference numbers and a one-line description. On a scheme with a long build programme it is the document that tells you when to stop asking.
Presenting the drawings
Authorities refuse or delay amendments that are hard to check. The submission should make the change obvious in under a minute.
- List the superseded drawing numbers and the replacement numbers side by side, with revision letters.
- Supply a short schedule of changes in words, item by item, referenced to drawings.
- Mark the change on the drawing itself, using a cloud or a simple annotation rather than expecting the officer to overlay two PDFs.
- Confirm explicitly which conditions are affected and which drawing list condition needs updating.
- Say why the change is non-material, in three or four sentences, against the tests above.
That last item is the one most often missing. A case officer with 40 live cases will take a reasoned paragraph seriously and will not construct the argument for you.
When to accept that section 73 is the right route
Section 73 lets you apply to vary or remove a condition, including the condition listing approved drawings, and it produces a new planning permission sitting alongside the original. That brings consequences: a fresh six-week window for challenge, a recalculation of the levy under the levy regulations, and, on relevant schemes, the biodiversity gain condition attaching to the new permission. The surcharges that follow a missed commencement notice are a reminder that a new permission also resets the notice obligations.
The Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 inserted section 73B, allowing an application to vary a permission where the effect would not be substantially different from the original. Check its commencement position before relying on it; as at September 2026 the practical route for most amendments remains section 96A or section 73.
The decision rule I use: if the change touches the external envelope in a way a neighbour could see, or touches anything a consultee relied on, go to section 73 and accept the fee and the eight weeks. If it is internal, corrective or invisible from outside, section 96A. Anything in between, ask the case officer before applying, because the 28 days you lose on a refused amendment cost more than the fee difference.
This is general guidance rather than legal advice, and materiality is decided by your local planning authority on the facts, so check the position with the authority or a qualified professional before relying on it.
PlanScope drafts the supporting statements that sit around an amendment, structured to UK planning policy, and the pricing page sets out what that costs. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.
Frequently asked questions
Can I appeal a refused non-material amendment?
No. Section 96A carries no right of appeal, so a refusal leaves the original permission untouched and the applicant several weeks worse off. The usual next step is a section 73 application to vary the condition listing approved drawings, which is decided in eight weeks and does carry appeal rights.
How long does a section 96A application take?
The determination period is 28 days from receipt of a valid application. Authorities cannot agree extensions of time in the way they can on full applications, and there is no deemed consent if the period expires without a decision. In practice that means chasing the case officer rather than assuming approval.
Can a non-material amendment extend the life of a permission?
No. Section 96A cannot be used to extend the time limit for implementation, so a permission approaching expiry needs a fresh application or lawful commencement before the deadline. It also cannot change the description of development written on the decision notice.
Do previous amendments affect a new application?
Yes, and this catches people out. Section 96A(2) requires the authority to consider the proposed change together with any earlier changes made under the same section. Four minor amendments can add up to something material, so keep a schedule of every amendment against each permission with dates and references.
Does an amendment change the Community Infrastructure Levy position?
A section 96A amendment does not create a new permission, so it does not itself trigger a fresh levy calculation, but an amendment that alters floorspace cuts across the figures already used. A section 73 permission is a new permission and the levy is recalculated under the levy regulations. Check both before submitting.
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.