Independent Examination
The Inspector Examines the Plan the Council Has Submitted
The examination is inquisitorial and plan-focused. The Inspector decides the main issues, procedure and evidence needed to reach conclusions.
Submission transfers control of the examination process to the appointed Inspector, supported by a Programme Officer. The council remains the plan-making authority, but it cannot privately determine the hearing agenda or outcome.
The Inspector reviews the submitted plan, evidence base, consultation documents, legal compliance material and representations. Initial questions may seek clarification, updated information or statements of common ground before hearing sessions begin.
Hearing sessions are organised by matters, issues and questions rather than by objector. Several site promoters may take part in the same discussion about housing requirement, spatial strategy, settlement allocations or delivery. Contributions should be concise and responsive.
The Inspector is not deciding a planning application and does not simply rank all promoted sites. An omitted site is relevant where it demonstrates a defect in the submitted plan or provides a realistic remedy that can be considered fairly and with the necessary appraisal.
Examination documents are normally published in an online library. Monitoring that library is essential because council answers, updated trajectories and proposed modifications can materially alter a landowner’s case.
The best examination contribution answers the Inspector’s question, cites the evidence and states the modification necessary to make the plan sound.
Before Hearings
Six Things a Landowner Should Do After Submission
Organise representation rights, monitor the library and prepare around the Inspector’s agenda rather than a generic site presentation.
Confirm Duly Made Status
Check that the representation was accepted, recorded against the correct policy or site and includes any hearing request.
Contact the Programme Officer
Use the appointed independent contact for procedural questions, deadlines and hearing arrangements.
Read Initial Questions
Identify matters that engage the site, preferred allocations, supply, infrastructure or appraisal.
Review New Evidence
Track council responses, statements of common ground, trajectory changes and technical updates.
Prepare a Focused Statement
Answer the relevant matter, issue and question and identify the exact modification sought.
Coordinate the Team
Avoid conflicting boundaries, capacities or positions between planning, highways, landscape, legal and landowner evidence.
Examination Stages
From Submission to the Inspector’s Report
The exact sequence is set by the Inspector, but several common stages help landowners understand what happens next.
After submission, the Inspector conducts an initial review and may ask whether there are fundamental concerns, missing documents or legal issues. Preliminary meetings are less common than in the past but can be used where procedure needs to be settled.
The Inspector publishes matters, issues and questions and a hearing programme. Participants may be invited to submit hearing statements with word limits and deadlines. Written-only objectors remain part of the examination record.
Hearing sessions test the plan through round-table discussion. The Inspector may request action notes, additional evidence or statements of common ground. Any further work should be limited to what is requested and necessary.
If the plan can be made sound, proposed main modifications are normally prepared and consulted on with supporting appraisal where required. The Inspector then issues a report recommending whether the plan can be adopted and identifying necessary modifications.
Submission
Plan, evidence and representations sent for examination.
Initial Review
Inspector identifies fundamental and procedural issues.
Questions and Hearings
Focused examination of the main soundness matters.
Further Work
Targeted evidence or clarification where requested.
Main Modifications
Consultation on changes necessary for soundness or legality.
Report and Adoption
Inspector’s conclusions followed by the council’s adoption decision.
Participation
Written Representations and Hearing Sessions
A hearing is not a courtroom trial, but preparation, evidence discipline and procedural fairness remain important.
Written representations are considered even where the objector does not attend. A landowner should not request hearing participation solely to gain greater weight; the value of the case comes from its relevance and evidence.
At a hearing, address the Inspector rather than debating other participants. Listen to the question and avoid reading a pre-written speech. Refer to documents by examination reference and explain the remedy succinctly.
New evidence is controlled. The examination should not become a rolling evidence exercise, and the Inspector may decline material that could have been submitted earlier or does not answer an identified issue. Seek procedural directions through the Programme Officer.
Statements of common ground can narrow disputes and confirm matters such as capacity, availability, infrastructure or agreed policy wording. They do not prevent remaining soundness points being examined.
- Use examination document references
- Answer the stated matter, issue and question
- Separate agreed facts from disputed judgement
- Avoid repeating the whole written representation
- State the necessary modification clearly
- Comply with word limits and deadlines
- Use the Programme Officer for procedure
- Maintain consistent site evidence across the team
Omitted Sites
Can a New Site Be Allocated During Examination?
It can arise in limited circumstances, but examination is not an open competition for every rejected site.
The starting point is a defect in the submitted plan. If an allocation fails, supply is insufficient or a strategy is unsound, the Inspector may consider whether a modification can resolve the problem. The council must usually have asked the Inspector to recommend main modifications.
A replacement or additional site needs adequate evidence and procedural fairness. Sustainability appraisal, habitats assessment, consultation, infrastructure and site-specific policy work may be required. Other affected parties must have a fair opportunity to comment.
An omitted site advanced consistently through plan preparation is generally better placed than land raised for the first time at examination. The prior evidence trail helps demonstrate that the alternative was known and appraised.
Sometimes the appropriate remedy is a reserve-site policy, adjusted trajectory, reduced reliance on a strategic allocation or further plan review rather than immediate allocation of the promoted parcel.
Soundness Defect
A necessary problem must first be established.
Known Alternative
The site should have a clear promotion and evidence history.
Appraisal
Environmental and sustainability implications need assessment.
Consultation
Affected parties must have a fair opportunity to respond.
Deliverability
Access, ownership, infrastructure and timing must be credible.
Proportionate Remedy
Allocation is one option, not the automatic outcome.
Treat examination as a route to correct the submitted plan, not as a late substitute for Call for Sites and earlier consultation.
Possible Outcomes
What the Inspector Can Conclude
The outcome depends on whether identified problems can be cured without undermining the plan’s overall strategy and fairness.
A sound and legally compliant plan may proceed without main modifications, although additional modifications that do not affect soundness may be made by the council. More commonly, the Inspector identifies main modifications necessary for adoption.
The examination can pause or allow further work where a focused issue is capable of resolution. Suspension is not guaranteed and should not be used to rewrite a fundamentally defective plan indefinitely.
Where necessary changes cannot make the plan sound or legally compliant, the authority may withdraw it or the Inspector can recommend that it is not adopted. New-system procedure also provides for recommendations in accordance with the 2026 regulations.
After a favourable report, the council decides whether to adopt the plan with the recommended main modifications. It cannot adopt a plan that the Inspector has not recommended as capable of adoption under the applicable statutory framework.
- Sound without main modifications
- Sound subject to recommended main modifications
- Focused further work or pause in examination
- Withdrawal by the council
- Inspector concludes the plan cannot be made sound
- Adoption decision following the report
Examination Preparation
Turn the Submitted Representation Into a Focused Examination Case
The Inspector controls the examination through matters, issues and questions. Preparation should answer those questions and preserve the original objection without reopening the entire Local Plan.
Build an examination file containing the submitted representation, council response, relevant policies, evidence-base extracts, site assessment, sustainability appraisal, technical reports and correspondence showing availability. Use a document index and paragraph references. The Inspector and programme officer should not have to search a large bundle to find the passage relied upon.
Read the Inspector’s matters, issues and questions closely. Identify which question captures the soundness or legal-compliance point and whether a hearing statement has been invited. A statement should answer that question directly, usually within a word limit, and explain any genuinely new factual update. Repetition of the complete representation can obscure the issue.
Check participation status and deadlines. A person who made a representation seeking a change to a legacy publication plan can have rights governed by the applicable procedure, but the Inspector determines hearing arrangements. New-system examinations follow their own statutory and procedural framework. Use the programme officer’s directions rather than assumptions from another authority.
Prepare a statement of common ground where it can narrow factual disputes. The council may agree that the site is available, a junction is achievable or a capacity is realistic while disputing strategy. Recording agreement allows hearing time to focus on the unresolved soundness issue. Do not concede a point merely to obtain a statement.
Coordinate the planning team. The landowner, planning consultant, highway adviser, landscape adviser and solicitor should use the same boundary, capacity and requested modification. Conflicting oral answers about delivery or ownership can damage confidence even where the written case is strong.
Core Document File
Index the exact evidence and submitted representation relied upon.
Matter and Question
Link each argument to the Inspector’s published examination issue.
Focused Statement
Answer the question within directions and avoid unnecessary repetition.
Common Ground
Agree facts that do not need hearing time while preserving disputed conclusions.
Witness Roles
Decide who answers planning, technical, delivery and legal questions.
Consistent Remedy
Use one clear modification request across statements and oral submissions.
The examination tests the submitted plan. A landowner case is most effective when it shows how a defined defect prevents adoption and how a proportionate modification can resolve it.
At and After the Hearing
How to Participate Effectively Without Treating the Session Like a Court Trial
Local Plan hearings are inquisitorial. The Inspector asks questions to test the plan, and concise evidence-based answers are usually more valuable than adversarial speeches.
Prepare short answers to the likely questions: what is the defect, which evidence supports it, why it is material, what change is sought and whether that change is deliverable. Bring paragraph references and plans. An opening statement may not be invited, so the case must be capable of being explained in response to the discussion rather than through a prepared speech alone.
Listen to other participants and avoid repeating points already made. Add evidence, correct a material misunderstanding or explain why the council’s answer does not resolve the issue. The Inspector may move between participants and topics quickly. Keep notes of questions, undertakings and any action assigned to the council or landowner.
Do not introduce a substantially different site, boundary or development concept without permission and a fairness process. If circumstances have changed, explain the change and why it is relevant to the original representation. The Inspector may decline late material that other parties have not had a fair opportunity to consider.
After the session, comply precisely with action-note deadlines and scope. An action response is not an invitation for a second hearing statement. Provide the requested table, plan, wording or evidence and identify any agreed position. Ask the programme officer about procedure rather than contacting the Inspector privately.
Monitor post-hearing correspondence, main-modification schedules, sustainability-appraisal addenda and consultation. If the site becomes relevant as a replacement or additional allocation, be ready with current delivery evidence. If it does not, retain the examination record for any later plan review or application strategy and avoid misrepresenting comments as an endorsement.
Concise Answers
State defect, evidence, consequence, remedy and delivery in a clear sequence.
Document References
Direct the Inspector to the exact policy, table, report and paragraph.
Fairness
Avoid late expansion that other participants cannot properly address.
Action Notes
Submit only the information requested, in the form and timescale directed.
Modification Monitoring
Review proposed changes and supporting appraisal as soon as published.
Accurate Record
Keep notes and avoid claiming the Inspector reached a conclusion before the report.
Professional, responsive participation improves credibility. The hearing is a discussion led by the Inspector, not an opportunity to cross-examine the council or repeat promotional material.
Practical Hearing Logistics
Remove Administrative Risk Before the Examination Session
A strong planning case can be undermined by missed directions, inaccessible documents or uncertainty about who is authorised to speak for the landowner.
Confirm the programme officer’s contact details, hearing format, attendance method, statement deadline, word limit and document-submission rules. Register representatives and technical participants in the form requested. Test remote links and accessibility arrangements early where the hearing is online or hybrid.
Prepare a compact hearing bundle with the matter, question, representation, statement, site plan, requested wording and key evidence extracts. Use searchable PDFs and consistent page numbers. Have the full evidence available, but avoid burdening the session with a large unindexed file that was not submitted in accordance with directions.
Agree speaking roles and authority with the landowner before the hearing. The planning witness should know which commercial or technical matters require another adviser and when to offer a written action response rather than speculate. Record any limits on accepting wording or factual agreements during the session.
Prepare the landowner for the range of possible outcomes. The Inspector may agree that a weakness exists but conclude that it is not material, can be cured by wording, or does not require the promoted site. Agree in advance which factual concessions can be made, which modification would be acceptable and which issues should be preserved for a later plan. This avoids improvised commercial decisions during a fast hearing discussion.
- Programme officer and current examination timetable
- Attendance, format and accessibility confirmed
- Statement and document directions complied with
- Searchable indexed hearing bundle
- Speaking roles and landowner authority
- Action-note and post-hearing contact procedure
Administrative preparation allows hearing time to be used on soundness and evidence rather than missing documents, uncertain instructions or technical problems.
How Value My Land Can Help
Prepare for Examination With a Clear Site and Soundness Strategy
Value My Land can review the submitted representation, examination questions and emerging evidence to identify where the site is relevant to the Inspector’s agenda.
We can help prepare concise hearing material, coordinate consultant evidence and define the modification sought.
Where main modifications or a failing allocation create an opportunity, we can assess whether the promoted site is a realistic and procedurally fair remedy.
Our Initial Review Can Include
- Review of duly made representations and examination rights
- Monitoring and analysis of the examination library
- Preparation of focused hearing statements
- Coordination of planning and technical evidence
- Drafting of proposed main modifications
- Assessment of omitted-site and reserve-site opportunities
Official Planning and Legal Sources
The following official sources provide the current statutory or policy context. Always check the version and transition arrangements that apply to the particular council, plan or application.
August 2026 National Policy
How the August 2026 NPPF Changes What Happens at a Local Plan Examination?
The final framework distinguishes the new plan-making system from legacy plans still progressing under transitional arrangements. The correct policy tests therefore depend on the legal route and stage of the particular plan rather than the consultation label alone.
Use Proportionate and Current Evidence
Policies PM8 and PM9 require proportionate evidence and a structured land assessment. Site promotion should explain suitability, availability, achievability, infrastructure and delivery without commissioning application-level work that is unnecessary at the plan stage.
Compare Reasonable Alternatives Transparently
The site-assessment record should identify consistent criteria, explain how constraints and opportunities were scored, and show why selected sites form an appropriate strategy. A representation is stronger where it traces a specific defect in the evidence or comparison rather than relying on preference alone.
Apply the Correct Soundness Tests
New-system local plans are assessed under PM15 as Positive, Appropriate, Effective, Consistent with national policy and in Conformity with any spatial development strategy. A legacy plan may continue under the policy and legal regime preserved by Annex A, so the examination basis must be stated expressly.
Check the Transition Before Quoting Policy
Plans prepared under the 2026 regulations and spatial development strategies use the August 2026 framework. Other plans may continue under the December 2024 NPPF and its transition rules. Neighbourhood plans submitted by 17 August 2026 also receive specific protection.
A landowner submission should identify the applicable plan system, policy version, evidence defect, consequence and precise remedy. References to the December 2024 NPPF should be retained only where they accurately describe a legacy or transitional plan.
Read the National Planning Policy Framework published on 17 August 2026.
Related Guides
These pages address the neighbouring issues without duplicating the specific problem covered by this guide.
How to Demonstrate a Local Plan Is Unsound
Build the substantive case examined by the Inspector.
Read guideRegulation 18 and 19 Representations
Understand how a legacy representation reaches examination.
Read guideMain Modifications and New Site Opportunities
Review the principal examination remedy stage.
Read guideSite Discounted From Local Plan Allocation
Consider the omitted-site strategy before and during examination.
Read guideSustainability Appraisal and Reasonable Alternatives
Understand appraisal and consultation requirements for changes.
Read guideLocal Plan Site-Selection Methodologies
Review the selection evidence likely to be tested.
Read guideLocal Plan Allocation Guide
Place examination within the complete allocation process.
Read guideEngland Local Plan Tracker
Monitor submission and examination progress.
Read guidePlanning Policy and Development Land
Review how emerging and adopted plans affect development.
Read guideFrequently Asked Questions About a Local Plan Examination
Who conducts a Local Plan examination?
An independent Planning Inspector, or panel of Inspectors, appointed by the Secretary of State. A Programme Officer acts as the independent procedural contact between participants and the Inspector.
Is the examination a court hearing?
No. It is generally inquisitorial and organised around the Inspector’s matters, issues and questions. Participants discuss the evidence in a structured round-table format rather than presenting a conventional adversarial trial.
Are written representations given less weight?
No automatic hierarchy applies. Duly made written representations are considered. Hearing participation is useful where oral discussion can assist the Inspector, not because attendance itself gives the case greater weight.
Can I submit new evidence at any time?
No. Deadlines and procedural directions apply, and the Inspector may limit evidence that is late, unnecessary or not directed to an examination issue. Use the Programme Officer to clarify permission and format.
Can the Inspector choose my site instead of a preferred allocation?
Only within the examination’s purpose and fair procedure. A soundness defect must be identified, and any replacement or additional allocation may require appraisal, consultation and delivery evidence. It is not a routine re-run of site selection.
What is a hearing statement?
It is a concise document responding to specified matters, issues and questions. It should avoid repeating the full representation, cite examination documents and state the modification sought.
What are main modifications?
They are changes necessary to make the plan sound or legally compliant. They are normally consulted on before the Inspector’s final report and may require supporting sustainability appraisal or other assessment.
Can the examination be paused?
The Inspector may allow focused further work or a pause where appropriate, but there is no right to suspension and it should not be assumed that a fundamentally flawed strategy can be rewritten during examination.
What happens after the Inspector’s report?
If the plan is recommended as capable of adoption, usually with main modifications, the council considers adoption. If it cannot be made sound or legally compliant, withdrawal or non-adoption may follow.
How can Value My Land help at examination?
We can review the examination relevance of the site, prepare focused statements, coordinate technical evidence and assess proposed modifications and replacement-site opportunities.
Is Your Site or Representation Going to Local Plan Examination?
Send us the examination reference, representation and site evidence. We can help identify the relevant questions, necessary modification and realistic next steps.
Request Your Free Land Review