®Planning appeal decision
45a Prout Grove, London, NW10 1PU
Planning appeal 3245304 at 45a Prout Grove, London, NW10 1PU (London Borough of Brent) was dismissed on 6 August 2021 by Inspector Satheesan R, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: The main issue on appeal B is whether the Council's refusal to issue a certificate is well founded.
Without planning permission, the material change of use of the premises to a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) and flats("the unauthorised change of use)
- Authority
- London Borough of Brent
- Appeal type
- ldc · Lawful Development Certificate
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- residential · Change of use
- Inspector
- Satheesan R
- Postcode
- NW10 1PU
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- The main issue on appeal B is whether the Council's refusal to issue a certificate is well founded
- Whether the appellant has proven on the balance of probability that the use of the property changed to 6 self-contained flats (Use Class C3) on or before 4 August 2015 (that being 4 years prior to the date of the LDC application) and that the use then continued without significant interruption for 4 years after the date of the change
What decided it
The finding of fact, based on site visit observations, photographic evidence and oral testimony, that all occupants relied on the shared communal kitchen for cooking, meaning the premises constituted a single HMO rather than the mixed HMO/flats use alleged.
What the Inspector cited
- Judgments
- Westminster CC v SoSCLG [2015] EWCA Civ 482; Islington Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2019] EWHC 2691 (Admin); R (on the application of Welwyn Hatfield Council) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2009] EWHC 966 (Admin); Swale Borough Council v First Secretary of State [2005] EWCA Civ 1568; Uratemp Holdings Ltd v Collins [2001] UKHL 43; Brent LBC v Secretary of State and Reiner [2020] EWHC 3620 (Admin); Gravesham BC v Secretary of State for Environment (1984) 47 P & CR 142; Hammersmith LBC v SoSE [1975] 30 P&CR 19
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in London Borough of Brent
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2021
- Notice upheld30 September 2026335948630 Randall Avenue, London, NW2 7RN
- Planning permission granted25 September 2026337716026 Sidmouth Road, London, NW2 5HJ
- Notice upheld24 September 20263365164Land and Garage, Rear of 21 Ivy Road and Adjacent to 31 Cedar Road, London, NW2 6SN
- Split Decision17 September 2026335746261 Alder Grove, London, NW2 7DE
- Notice varied and upheld16 September 2026336503173A and the Rear Part of 73 Willesden Lane, Kilburn, London, NW6 7RR
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.