Refused by Merton Council? We read the decision notice, tell you honestly whether to appeal or resubmit, and prepare the drawings and statement that answer each reason for refusal on the Planning Inspectorate's terms.
Merton Council granted 88% of the householder planning decisions it made in its latest published year — 1 point above the 87% England-wide householder average. The wooded, low-density character of Wimbledon Village and the Common caps bulk and roof enlargement on many plots, which is where a policy-literate drawing pack earns its keep. Its dominant Victorian (1837–1901), Edwardian (1901–1910) and interwar (1918–1939) housing stock sets the design brief on most streets.
The permitted-development ceilings are fixed: 40m³ of new roof volume for a terraced loft and 50m³ for a semi or detached house under Class B, plus a 3m single-storey rear extension on a terrace or 4m on a detached house under Class A. Merton carries at least one Article 4 direction, and conservation areas including Wimbledon Village, John Innes (Merton Park) and Mitcham Cricket Green remove those rights outright, so we confirm your exact address before a line is drawn. A validated householder application in Merton is determined against an 8-week statutory target.
Wimbledon (the leafy Village above Edwardian and Victorian streets), Merton Park (the John Innes estate of Arts and Crafts and Edwardian houses), Mitcham (interwar housing wrapped around the historic cricket green), Raynes Park (grids of Edwardian terraces west of the line), Colliers Wood (compact Victorian terraces along the Wandle) and Morden (1930s semi-detached suburbia and the St Helier fringe) — these are the Merton pockets our drawings cover most. Heritage designations here include Wimbledon Village, John Innes (Merton Park), Mitcham Cricket Green, Cottenham Park and Wimbledon West. Merton Council weighs each proposal against Merton Local Plan and the council's Design SPD, where the John Innes estate's Arts and Crafts detailing is protected in fine grain, down to porches, gates and boundary walls. Pockets of Wimbledon and Colliers Wood hold converted Victorian flats and maisonettes, which carry no householder permitted-development rights of their own.. On roofs the borough is pitched and gabled roofs on the terraces and villas and hipped roofs on the interwar semis, over Victorian and Edwardian terraces, detached Wimbledon villas and interwar semi-detached houses.
Two routes exist and they suit different refusals. A free-go resubmission — a fresh application within twelve months of the refusal, on the same site and in the same description — costs no fee and lets you change the scheme. An appeal keeps the scheme as refused and asks an Inspector to disagree with Merton Council. Where the refusal reasons are about design detail that can be fixed, resubmission is usually faster; where they are about principle, an appeal is the only route that resolves it.
The decision notice is the brief. Each numbered reason cites policy and states a harm, and the appeal has to meet each one with evidence — sections showing daylight, elevations showing the relationship to neighbours, a site plan proving separation distances. Assertion loses appeals. Merton is largely Victorian and Edwardian terraces, detached Wimbledon villas and interwar semi-detached houses, and pitched and gabled roofs on the terraces and villas and hipped roofs on the interwar semis shape what the Inspector will accept as characteristic here.
The wooded, low-density character of Wimbledon Village and the Common caps bulk and roof enlargement on many plots, which frequently appears in refusal reasons and therefore has to be addressed head-on. Merton has withdrawn permitted-development rights on parts of the John Innes and Wimbledon Village conservation areas through Article 4 directions, so alterations that would be automatic elsewhere need a householder application here.
We give an honest read of the decision notice first. An appeal is usually the right route where:
We take each numbered reason for refusal and answer it with a drawing or an evidenced statement — not with a restatement of the original application. That is the difference between an appeal that reads as a complaint and one that reads as a case.
Below is Merton Council's real decision record, drawn from official planning statistics and refreshed as new data lands. Merton consents the large majority of householder schemes, yet the leafy Wimbledon conservation areas and the uniform villa streets set close limits on how far roofs and side additions can go. Knowing what this authority actually refuses, and why, is the starting point for deciding whether to appeal or to redesign.
Source: MHCLG planning application statistics (householder decisions, rolling year). Compare every borough on our London approval-rate league table.
Tell us about your project and get a fixed, no-obligation quote back within one working day. If you don't need planning permission at all, we'll tell you that too — for free.
Across Wimbledon, Merton Park and Mitcham, the appeals that succeed are narrow and evidenced. They show the daylight test drawn rather than described, they cite the Inspector's own decisions on comparable sites, and they concede the points that are not worth arguing so the case concentrates on the ones that are. An appeal that disputes every reason equally reads as unfocused and usually fails on the strongest one.
The John Innes estate's Arts and Crafts detailing is protected in fine grain, down to porches, gates and boundary walls. Most householder appeals are decided by written representations, with the Inspector visiting the site unaccompanied. That makes the drawings the primary evidence: what is not on the page is not in front of the Inspector. We prepare the set on that basis, and where the honest answer is that the refusal was sound, we say so and redesign instead.
We prepare appeal drawings and statements across Merton. A few of the areas where refusals come up most often:
Appeal drawings for Wimbledon — the leafy Village above Edwardian and Victorian streets — answering Merton Council's reasons for refusal with evidence rather than assertion.
Appeal drawings for Merton Park — the John Innes estate of Arts and Crafts and Edwardian houses — answering Merton Council's reasons for refusal with evidence rather than assertion.
Appeal drawings for Mitcham — interwar housing wrapped around the historic cricket green — answering Merton Council's reasons for refusal with evidence rather than assertion.
Appeal drawings for Raynes Park — grids of Edwardian terraces west of the line — answering Merton Council's reasons for refusal with evidence rather than assertion.
Appeal drawings for Colliers Wood — compact Victorian terraces along the Wandle — answering Merton Council's reasons for refusal with evidence rather than assertion.
Appeal drawings for Morden — 1930s semi-detached suburbia and the St Helier fringe — answering Merton Council's reasons for refusal with evidence rather than assertion.
Three responses to a refusal, with different costs, timescales and prospects.
| Route | Deadline | Typical timescale | Best where |
|---|---|---|---|
| Householder appeal | 12 weeks from the decision | About 8–12 weeks | The refusal turns on principle or a disputed harm |
| Section 78 appeal (other) | 6 months from the decision | Several months | Larger schemes, change of use, new dwellings |
| Free-go resubmission | 12 months from the decision | 8 weeks | The reasons are fixable design detail |
| Fresh application, redesigned | No deadline | 8 weeks | The scheme needs a different approach entirely |
Deadlines from the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, section 78, and the Planning Inspectorate's published appeal procedures.
A process built around the decision notice, because that is what the Inspector reads first.
Send us the decision notice and the refused drawings. We tell you honestly whether the reasons are appealable, whether a resubmission is faster, and how Merton Council has fared on comparable appeals.
We gather the material that answers each reason — daylight geometry, separation distances, decided appeals on similar sites, and the relevant policies read in full rather than in extract.
We prepare the drawings the Inspector needs and a statement of case that takes each numbered reason in turn, conceding what should be conceded and evidencing the rest.
We lodge the appeal inside the deadline, respond to the council's statement, and revise free until the Inspector issues a decision.
Twelve weeks from the date on the decision notice for a householder appeal, and six months for most other section 78 appeals. The deadline is strict and the Planning Inspectorate will not accept a late appeal, so the first thing we do on a Merton refusal is check the date and work backwards from it. Merton Council is the decision-maker.
It depends what the reasons say. If they identify design detail you are willing to change, a free-go resubmission within twelve months costs no application fee and usually resolves faster. If they refuse the principle — that an extension of this type does not belong here at all — only an appeal settles it, because a resubmission would meet the same objection. This applies to your Merton address specifically. Merton Council is the decision-maker.
Nationally, a minority of householder appeals succeed, and the ones that do tend to be narrow, evidenced and focused on a single disputed harm. We look at how Merton Council's refusals have fared at appeal and at comparable decisions nearby before advising, and we will tell you when we think the refusal was sound — an appeal with no prospect costs months.
The scheme itself cannot change on appeal — the Inspector determines the application as refused. What usually needs preparing is evidence: sections showing daylight, elevations showing the relationship to neighbours, and context drawings showing what already exists on the street. Those explain why the refused scheme causes no harm, without altering it. This applies to your Merton address specifically. Merton Council is the decision-maker.
In most written-representation appeals, yes — usually unaccompanied, viewing the site from public land and neighbouring property where access is arranged. That is why the drawings matter so much: the Inspector sees the site once, briefly, and everything else comes from the paperwork you submitted. This applies to your Merton address specifically. Merton Council is the decision-maker.
Only where the council has behaved unreasonably — refusing against its own officer's clear recommendation without evidence, or failing to substantiate a reason for refusal. Costs awards are the exception rather than the norm, and they are decided separately from the appeal itself. Where the grounds genuinely exist, we make the application alongside the appeal. This applies to your Merton address specifically. Merton Council is the decision-maker.
We quote each Merton appeal individually after reading the decision notice, because the work depends entirely on how many reasons are in play and what evidence they demand, and send a fixed, no-obligation quote within one working day. The refusal review itself is free. Call 020 7864 7245 to start. Merton Council is the decision-maker.
Answer five quick questions and get a free planning score for your exact address — instantly. Then, if you want the full picture, unlock the detailed analysis: your council's live approval rates, local precedents, constraints on your street and a step-by-step route to permission.
Same fixed quotes, same fast drawings — wherever your project is.