Which councils have a poor appeal quality measure?
MHCLG’s January–March 2026 planning statistics say ten authorities were currently designated for the quality of decisions on major applications: Cherwell, Dacorum, Epping Forest, Hertsmere, Lewes, Malvern Hills, Rossendale, South Tyneside, Staffordshire Moorlands and Wychavon. Lewes was designated in May 2024; the other nine in June 2026. The formal threshold is more than 10% of all relevant decisions being overturned at appeal over the assessment period. This is not “over 10% of appeals allowed”. MHCLG §3.10 ↗
This official designation list identifies a group of concerning appeal outcomes; it does not rank them first to tenth. Different workloads and small denominators can distort a simple percentage.
How can local opposition affect a decision?
“NIMBY” (“not in my back yard”) is often applied to people resisting nearby development. Some objections raise genuine planning issues, such as flood risk, traffic, heritage or habitat effects; others focus on change itself. Residents may submit representations, organise campaigns, speak to councillors or seek changes to a plan. A committee may refuse a proposal against officer advice, and an applicant may then appeal. Each decision still has to rest on relevant planning grounds. Reading Borough Council says the volume of opposition is not itself a material consideration. Reading guidance ↗ Government decision guidance ↗
Do more objection letters mean more refusals?
Not established by these examples. A national correlation would need application-level objection counts, decisions, development size, site characteristics and appeal outcomes collected consistently across councils. We have not found or analysed such a joined national dataset. The contrasting cases below show why a simple claim would mislead.