Merton Council's Development and Planning Applications Committee has reviewed recent planning appeal decisions, revealing a mixed bag of results for applicants. While some appeals for extensions and alterations were successful, the Planning Inspectorate largely dismissed appeals related to houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) and other developments.

The committee noted the Planning Appeal Decisions report at their meeting on 31 July 2025. The report detailed decisions made by the Planning Inspectorate on appeals against the council's original planning application decisions. According to the report, applicants have the right to challenge a dismissed appeal in the High Court within six weeks of the decision letter date, as per Section 288 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990, or Section 63 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, if they believe the decision was outside the powers of the Act or that relevant requirements were not met. The Appeals Report - July 2025 states that any appeal decision is final unless successfully challenged in the Courts. If a challenge is successful, the appeal decision will be overturned and sent back to the Secretary of State for re-determination. However, this does not guarantee that the original appeal decision will be reversed upon re-determination.

Several appeals against the council's refusal of extensions and alterations were allowed. These included:

  • Orion House, 3 Cranbrook Road, Wimbledon - Appeal allowed for external balustrade with glazed glass screens.
  • 338 Garth Road, Lower Morden - Appeal allowed for a single storey outbuilding.
  • 1 Lambourne Avenue, Wimbledon Park - Appeal allowed for demolition and erection of a new house with alterations.
  • 200 Seaforth Avenue, New Malden - Appeal allowed for a single storey rear extension.
  • 34 Neath Gardens, Morden - Appeal allowed against refusal of erection of a two storey side extension.
  • 27 Florence Avenue, Morden - Appeal allowed against removal of condition 4, conversion of extended house into 2 x 3 bedroom dwellinghouses.

However, the Planning Inspectorate sided with the council in a number of cases, dismissing appeals against refusal for:

  • 28 Beech Grove, Mitcham - Conversion of a house into two self-contained flats.
  • 8 Bayham Road, Morden - A single storey rear extension.
  • 27 Wilton Crescent, Wimbledon - Conversion of roofspace to form second floor.
  • 56 New Barns Avenue, Mitcham - Continued use of property as a house of multiple occupation (HMO).
  • 65 Homefield Gardens, Mitcham - A single storey outbuilding.
  • 1 Red Studios Elm Grove, Wimbledon - Additional floor providing class E office space.
  • 3 High Street, Wimbledon - Roof extension to provide additional one bedroom studio flat.
  • 3 High Street, Wimbledon - A first floor rear extension above ground floor annex to accommodate 1 x studio flat.
  • Storage Building, ro 111 Kingston Road, Wimbledon - Conversion of building from general storage into 2 dwellings with erection of first floor extension.
  • 22 Conway Gardens, Mitcham - A single storey rear extension.
  • 31 Stanford Way, Streatham - Enforcement notice for installation of french doors leading to the first-floor roof.