Planning Inspector · PINS
Thomas Hatfield.
A planning inspector deciding appeals across London. Has decided 14 appeals from 6 boroughs, allowing 36% of appeals — above the London average of 26%. Where those appeals come from, and how they fell, is below.
Planning Inspector · PINS14 appeals36% allowed6 boroughs
Where appeals come from — by borough · tap to focus
FewerMore appeals
At a glanceEach metric links to the investigation behind it
All investigations →14
Appeals decided
5 allowed · 9 dismissed
—
Avg inquiry
awaits decision-notice ingestion
—
Costs awarded
not yet traced per inspector
Allowed rate over time — harsher or more lenient
Per-year allowed rates for this inspector aren't computed yet — the trend publishes when the dated PINS decision history is fully ingested. No trend is shown until it's real.
What they decide — by scheme type
The scheme-type mix hasn't been traced for this inspector yet — it publishes from the PINS development-type record where available.
Grounds that carry appeals — what this inspector upholds[1]
The policy grounds this inspector leans on most when deciding appeals — how often each appears, and how often an appeal citing it is allowed.
Policy grounds are coded from each decision letter — this table publishes when decision-notice ingestion lands. The raw policy references already sit on each appeal in the record below.
Backs the officer — case by case
Appeals where the committee refused against its own officer's recommendation — and whether this inspector then sided with the officer (allowing) or the committee (dismissing).
Matching this inspector's appeals to committee-vs-officer decisions isn't traced yet — it publishes with decision-notice ingestion. The London-wide pattern is already live in Committee Watch.
Appeals by borough
Borough
Appeals
Allowed rate
Where this inspector's appeals come from.[1] Click the map above to explore spatially, or a row to open the borough's appeals.
Costs awarded — by council
Costs decisions aren't yet traced to individual inspectors — the council-by-council costs table publishes when the PINS costs letters are ingested against this inspector's cases.
Recent appeals
Appeal ref
Borough
Outcome
Policies cited
Decided
3269287
Barnet
Allowed
N5090, N20, S73, CS1
2026-03-29
3284552
Haringey
Dismissed
Y5420, N17, D3, SP11
2026-03-29
3288472
Haringey
Dismissed
Y5420, N15, DM1, DM12
2026-03-29
3285470
Haringey
Dismissed
Y5420, N4, D14, DM1
2026-03-29
3269287
Barnet
Allowed
N5090, N20, S73, CS1
2026-03-29
3284552
Haringey
Dismissed
Y5420, N17, D3, SP11
2026-03-29
3288472
Haringey
Dismissed
Y5420, N15, DM1, DM12
2026-03-29
Show all 4 rows
3285470
Haringey
Dismissed
Y5420, N4, D14, DM1
2026-03-29
Full appeal history locked
Subscribe to see all 14 appeals →Agents at appeal
Which agents bring the most appeals before this inspector — and how often they win — publishes when the appeal case files are joined to the agent record. Pairing patterns, not endorsements.
At a glance
InspectorThomas Hatfield
BodyPINS
Appeals decided14
Allowed rate36%
London allowed avg26%
Boroughs6
Who decides here
Related investigations
Committee Watch — when members override their officers →
Where elected members override their planning officers — and how often the override is later overturned at appeal.
Refusal Hotspots — where it's hard →
The wards and boroughs where applications die — and the ones that wave almost everything through.
Sources & method
- [1]Appeals decided, allowed rate and the borough breakdown — Planning Inspectorate (PINS) published appeal decisions by this inspector across London. · PINS appeals casework
- [2]London-wide allowed-rate baseline — the same PINS appeal record aggregated across all 33 boroughs. · the Inspectorate — London
- [3]Scheme-type mix — PINS development-type classification of this inspector’s England-wide casework, where traced. · methodology
“Allowed” = the appeal succeeded, overruling the council. Methodology is published in full so every number is traceable to its primary source.