Regulation 18 and Regulation 19 Representations Explained

Complete every mandatory part of the council’s form. State whether the representation concerns legal compliance, soundness or both. Identify the policy, paragraph, allocation or omission and give the evidence supporting the objection.

For a legacy plan, use the soundness tests that apply to that plan under the relevant national policy and transitional arrangements. Do not automatically copy the August 2026 five-test wording into a legacy examination that remains governed by the December 2024 framework.

Explain the modification required. For an omitted site, this may involve a new allocation, amended settlement boundary, reserve-site mechanism or changes to the housing trajectory. Recognise that a late new allocation may require sustainability appraisal, consultation and other evidence.

Request participation at hearing sessions only where oral discussion would materially assist the Inspector. Written representations carry the same formal consideration, although hearing participation can be important for complex site-selection and soundness issues.

Do not submit only a generic brochure or consultant report. Add a representation that identifies the consultation issue, summarises the evidence and states the change requested. Conversely, do not make technical assertions without the source documents needed to support them.

Avoid treating planning permission and allocation as the same test. A site allocation case concerns the plan strategy, reasonable alternatives, infrastructure and delivery over the plan period. A planning application case concerns the development plan and national decision-making policy at the date of decision.

Do not ignore adverse matters. Acknowledge constraints and explain how the boundary, scale, design or evidence addresses them. Unsupported claims that a site has “no constraints” are rarely credible.

Finally, comply with process. Late representations may not be accepted as duly made, and an Inspector may have limited scope to consider a site that was not properly advanced through plan preparation.

Check the council’s consultation statement and representation database when published. Confirm that the response is attributed to the correct site and policy, attachments are listed, and the summary has not materially misstated the objection. Raise objective omissions promptly while retaining the original receipt and files.

At an early-stage consultation, look for changes in the next plan, sustainability appraisal and site-selection report. The council may accept part of the case without expressly saying so. Compare boundaries, capacity, wording and assessment scores and identify which unresolved matters need to be repeated at the later formal stage.

For a legacy publication representation, the council will normally prepare a response and submit representations with the plan. The Inspector examines the submitted plan, not a new case developed after the deadline. Keep the original soundness issue central while updating factual evidence in accordance with examination directions and fairness to other participants.

If hearing participation was requested, monitor the programme officer’s correspondence, matters and issues, hearing timetable and statement deadlines. A hearing statement should answer the Inspector’s questions and avoid repeating the complete representation. Coordinate statements of common ground on uncontested matters such as ownership, capacity or access where that helps narrow the dispute.

After examination hearings, follow action notes, council documents and proposed main modifications. Respond only through the published process. A modification consultation is usually about whether the proposed changes make the plan sound and legally compliant; it is not an unrestricted second Regulation 19 consultation on every aspect of the plan.