The "GPDO Part 1 (All Classes) - LDC Appeal Decisions" document has been updated to include 5 additional appeal decisions relating to householder permitted development legislation, for which the conclusions are as follows:

December 2025 - Code a01889 (appeal allowed):

• It is possible to issue an LDC under section 192 (proposed) for a larger rear extension (i.e. if the developer has successfully completed the prior approval process). (*)
• When submitting an application for an LDC for a larger rear extension (i.e. after successfully completing the prior approval process), it is not necessary to re-submit the additional information required by paragraph A.4(2). [Note: this is referring to the additional information that’s specifically required by paragraph A.4(2) for an application for prior approval, but not normally required for an application for an LDC].
  [Note: Relates to A.4(2)(c) of the GPDO 2015].
  [Quote: “The appellant provided the Council with the information set out at condition A.4(2) of Class A as part of an application seeking prior approval, and the Council provided the appellant with written notice that its prior approval was not required for the development on 16 May 2023.  It was at that point that the planning permission granted by the GPDO for the proposed development crystalised. [...] The Council’s case appears to rely on the claim that the information specified by paragraph A.4(2)(c) of Class A was not provided with the application for an LDC. That information is the addresses of any adjoining premises, but there was no need for the appellant to submit that as part of the application for an LDC. It is not the case, as the Council appears to be suggesting, that the appellant was obliged to submit another application for prior approval as part of the application for an LDC. That would have been illogical. The application for an LDC merely sought confirmation that the single storey rear extension (which the Council had previously confirmed did not require prior approval) would have been lawful if begun on 25 May 2023. The evidence shows it is likely those works would have been lawful at that time. I therefore see no reason why an LDC should not be issued.”].

December 2025 - Code a01888 (appeal allowed):

• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that the term “eaves” does not apply to a valley gutter (or similar). (*)
  [Note: The valley gutter has width approx 0.5m-0.6m].
  [Quote: “The main part of the dwellinghouse has a hipped roof that wraps around a valley gutter and terminates at two gables on its north-west elevation. The valley gutter discharges into a short gutter that has a downpipe down to a flat roof. The proposed enlargement would fill in the valley section by raising the outer three roof slopes of the hipped roof up to a flat roof centre section. The two gables on the north-west elevation would become a single gable with a flat top. The Council’s concerns relate to their interpretation of ‘eaves’. They consider that the three existing roof slopes down to the valley gutter have eaves. They do not. The ‘eaves’ of a building is the intersection of a roof slope with an external wall, where the roof usually extends a small way beyond the outer face of the wall. The roof slopes that terminate at the valley gutter do not intersect with an outer wall of the building and do not extend beyond any wall. There are no eaves to be maintained or reinstated and the enlargement of the roof would not be close to the eaves of the main part of the dwellinghouse, which is along its south-west, north-east and south-east elevations. In this case there is no need to comply with condition B.2(b)(i)(aa) and (bb).”].
• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that particular works do fall within the scope of Class B, on the basis that the works do not exceed what constitutes “the enlargement of a dwellinghouse consisting of an addition or alteration to its roof”. (*)
  [Note: The works include the replacement of an existing pitched roof that’s “U”-shaped (such that the inner roof slopes along the two “l”s of the “U” are joined to form a valley gutter) with a crown roof (i.e. a roof with a flat area in the centre and pitches at the sides)].
  [Quote: “Though not mentioned in the reason for refusal of the application the Council, in their appeal statement, refer to the nature of the proposed works and to an annotation on a drawing which states that ‘existing roof to be carefully removed, and a new roof to be constructed’. They comment that “…the whole roof structure will need to be removed with a new replacement roof structure with a different roof truss design installed” and “Such major works cannot be considered an ‘addition’ as nothing is being added to the existing roof and likewise it cannot be an ‘alteration’ to the roof as the existing roof is to be removed in its entirety…”. The GPDO does not define ‘addition’ or ‘alteration’ and does not limit the extent of works required to complete an addition or alteration of a roof. The annotation could refer to the existing roof covering, rather than to any roof structure, and no where in evidence is it suggested that “…the whole roof structure will need to be removed with a new replacement roof structure with a different roof truss design installed”. The proposed alteration to the roof of existing dwellinghouse is development permitted under Class B of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the GPDO.”].

December 2025 - Code a01887 (appeal allowed):

• [Note: To view this information, please log onto the website with a current membership.]

December 2025 - Code a01886 (appeal dismissed):

• [Note: To view this information, please log onto the website with a current membership.]

November 2025 - Code a01885 (appeal allowed):

• [Note: To view this information, please log onto the website with a current membership.]

Notes:

• To view the conclusions, summaries, and decision notices for any of the above appeals, please view the "GPDO Part 1 (All Classes) - LDC Appeal Decisions" document. As a member of the Planning Jungle website, you can view the decision notices for all of the appeals on the website for no extra cost.
• Any of the above conclusions marked with a "(*)" contradict other appeal decisions. The "Reference Section" within the above document indicates how many appeals have supported and contradicted each particular conclusion.