Requesting information from a planning file

Most of a planning file is already public, and the part you want is usually the part that is not. A planning file information request is how you get at officer notes, pre-application correspondence, consultee emails, viability material and the documents that appear on the file list but will not open.

Two regimes do the work. The Environmental Information Regulations 2004 cover environmental information, which on a planning application means almost everything. The Freedom of Information Act 2000 covers the rest. Choosing the right one changes the deadlines, the charges and the grounds on which the council can say no.

What is published as a matter of course

The council has a statutory duty to keep a register of applications and to make it available for inspection. The register holds a copy of each application, the plans and drawings submitted with it, and the decision together with its date, and our note on the statutory planning register sets out exactly what must appear there.

Beyond the register, most authorities publish a good deal more on their public access system as a matter of practice rather than duty. Officer reports, consultation responses from statutory consultees, the site notice, amended drawings and the decision notice are normally all there.

So start with the portal. Work through the document list, note the reference of anything that is listed but not viewable, and note what you would expect to see that is absent. A request that names documents is answered far faster than one that asks for the file.

Documents commonly withheld

Five categories account for most of what is held back.

• Personal data. Names, addresses, signatures and contact details of objectors and applicants are routinely redacted under the data protection provisions, and that redaction is usually correct.
• Legal advice. Advice from the council's own lawyers attracts legal professional privilege, and councils resist disclosure firmly.
• Unfinished material. Draft reports and documents in the course of completion can be withheld while a decision is pending.
• Internal communications. Officer emails and internal notes fall into an exception, though one that has to be weighed against the public interest.
• Sensitive environmental information. The location of a badger sett, a bat roost or a rare plant population is commonly redacted to protect the species, and that is a legitimate use of the exception.

Viability material is the contested category. National guidance expects viability assessments submitted with applications to be made publicly available, and an authority withholding one in full should be asked to justify that against the guidance rather than asserting commercial confidence.

Which regime applies and why it matters

Environmental information has a wide definition. It covers the state of the environment, factors affecting it, and measures and activities affecting or likely to affect it, which captures planning applications, decisions, policies and the correspondence around them.

The practical differences matter.

The presumption in favour of disclosure is the reason to frame a planning request under the environmental regulations wherever you can. There is no absolute exception, and the council has to show that the public interest in withholding outweighs the interest in release.

You do not have to get the label right. A public authority is obliged to handle the request under the correct regime whichever one you cite, but citing the environmental regulations puts the presumption on the table from the start.

Making a request that works

Keep it specific, short and dated.

1. Name the application reference and the site address.
2. List the documents or classes of document you want, using the descriptions on the portal where they exist.
3. Where you do not know what is held, ask for a schedule of documents on the file rather than for the file itself.
4. State that you rely on the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 because the information concerns a measure affecting the environment.
5. Ask for the material in electronic form, which avoids copying charges.
6. Give a deadline by reference to the twenty working days rather than a date of your own choosing.

Avoid two common mistakes. A request for "all correspondence" invites a refusal on grounds of manifest unreasonableness, and a request wrapped in complaint invites a slow reply. Ask for documents, not for explanations.

Timing is worth thinking about. Material withheld as unfinished or as internal deliberation while a decision is pending is often released once the decision has been issued, so a request refused in March can succeed in July on the same documents.

Time limits and what happens when they slip

Twenty working days is the standard period under both regimes. Under the environmental regulations that can be extended to forty working days where the request is complex or the volume large, and the council has to tell you it is relying on the extension within the original twenty.

If nothing arrives, write once to ask for an internal review. That is a formal step, it is free, and the authority is expected to complete it within forty working days under the environmental regulations. Keep the request and the review separate in your correspondence so the chronology is clear.

Councils miss deadlines for ordinary reasons: a single officer handling requests, a case officer on leave, a file in storage. A polite reminder that names the date of your request and the date the period expired usually produces more than an accusation of obstruction.

Refusals and the public interest test

A refusal has to tell you which exception is relied on and why. If it does not, ask.

Then test it. For each exception the question is whether the public interest in maintaining it outweighs the public interest in disclosure, and the presumption under the environmental regulations favours disclosure. Arguments that carry weight include the amount of public money involved, the fact that the decision has already been taken, the existence of significant local concern, and the absence of any continuing commercial sensitivity in a document years old.

Ask for partial disclosure as a fallback. Redaction of names and of sensitive locations often removes the only genuine objection, and an authority that refuses a document in full while conceding that redaction would answer its concern has weakened its own position.

After the internal review, the route is a complaint to the Information Commissioner, who can order disclosure, and then an appeal to the First-tier Tribunal. That takes months rather than weeks, so use it for material that will still matter when it arrives.

Using what you get

Documents are only useful if they change what you do. Read the officer's notes for the tests the council applied rather than for the conclusion. Read consultee responses for conditions that were recommended and not imposed. Read pre-application correspondence for what the applicant was told to expect.

Where amended plans were submitted during determination, the correspondence around them tells you whether the authority considered further consultation, which is the question addressed in our note on re-consultation after amended plans. Where the council itself was the applicant, the file is the main way to check that the procedural safeguards described in our note on applications made by the council on its own land were actually followed.

And if what you find changes your view of a live application, put it in a representation about planning matters rather than about process, because that is what the decision-maker can act on.

Anyone preparing an application can browse the report types to see what a submission normally contains, which also tells you what to look for on someone else's file.

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.