Thomas Tinel.
Active — last recorded decision Apr 2026
A case officer at Croydon with an approval rate of 55% across 224 decided planning applications, spanning 24 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.
Topic mentions per 1,000 words of their own report text (boilerplate stripped), indexed against all parsed Croydon reports. Attention, not stance.
Mark = borough average (1×). Bar capped at 2×.
Tinel's caseload spans HMO-related refusals, householder extensions and change-of-use, and he is distinctive for explicitly flagging the currently-underway EXAMINATION IN PUBLIC of the emerging revised Croydon Local Plan (2024) as a live process-status fact within his reports, noting its commencement date, before applying the current adopted plan. On GPDO/prior-approval refusals for HMO extensions, he cites the underlying UNLAWFUL use of the building itself (a C4 HMO use never lawfully established) as the basis for refusing permitted-development rights that would otherwise apply, rather than assessing the physical extension criteria alone.
· explicitly notes the live procedural status of the emerging revised Local Plan (e.g. that its examination in public has commenced, with a specific date), while still applying the currently adopted plan
· on GPDO/prior-approval determinations, checks whether the underlying USE of the building itself is lawful (e.g. an unlawfully-established C4 HMO use) as a threshold issue that can defeat permitted development rights regardless of the physical extension's own compliance
· on tree-protected sites, notes the specific stage of a Tree Protection Plan negotiation (an initial objection followed by a submitted plan resolving it) rather than a static compliance statement
· the live procedural status of the emerging revised Local Plan, including its examination in public commencement date
· whether the underlying use of a building (e.g. as an HMO) has ever been lawfully established, as a threshold issue for GPDO/prior-approval rights
· whether an initial Tree Officer objection to a missing Tree Protection Plan has since been resolved by a submitted plan
“The emerging revised Croydon Local Plan 2024 has been submitted for examination and the examination in public commenced at the beginning of September 2025.”
26/00778/HSE
“The existing use of the building as a House in Multiple Occupation (within Class C4) is unlawful.”
26/00812/GPDO
Measured from 34 published Croydon officer reports written by this officer, with recited policy boilerplate stripped before any counting. These describe how this officer works and writes — they are not outcome predictions. Every quote is from a named public report.
The policies this officer cites most in their own reports — times cited across 34 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.
Show all 24 rows
Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2021–26.[1] Click the map above to focus this page on a ward, or a row to open the ward.
- [1]Applications decided, approval rate, per-year trend and ward breakdown — London Borough of Croydon planning register and published decision notices, 2021–26. · methodology
- [2]Appeal overturn and decision-time benchmarks — Planning Inspectorate (PINS) appeal decisions and application date pairs; not yet computed per officer, shown as a dash until they are. · PINS appeals casework
- [3]Condition load — mean effective conditions attached to Croydon decision notices (grant/split), parsed from the published notice text; a borough figure, not yet split per case officer.
- [4]"How this officer decides", the policy playbook and all quotes — parsed from 34 published Croydon officer reports written by this officer, recited policy boilerplate stripped before counting; disposition text coded from their own reasoning with every quote machine-verified verbatim. Descriptive of how they work — not outcome predictions.