Eric Thompson.
Active — last recorded decision May 2026
A case officer at Enfield with an approval rate of 79% across 457 decided planning applications, spanning 20 wards.[1] Decision speed and appeal performance publish when decision notices are ingested.
Topic mentions per 1,000 words of their own report text (boilerplate stripped), indexed against all parsed Enfield reports. Attention, not stance.
Mark = borough average (1×). Bar capped at 2×.
Thompson works the 2024+ checklist ('Officer Commentary' under Yes/No/N/A criteria) template and is a compliance-first assessor on DMD11's 3-metre/45-degree extension test, refusing directly where an extension exceeds it rather than seeking a precedent-based justification, while being explicit that character objections beyond the amenity/policy scope 'are not material planning considerations'.
· states the DMD11 depth/45-degree tests as bright-line criteria and refuses on that basis where breached, rather than weighing neighbouring precedent as a mitigating factor
· distinguishes public objections that raise genuine material planning considerations from those that don't ('these concerns noted would be considered civil matters')
· explicitly notes the total public consultation response tally (support/objection/petition counts) before the substantive assessment
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: whether the proposal's depth and the 45-degree line test against DMD11 are met as bright-line criteria
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: whether each objection raised is a material planning consideration or a civil/building-regulations matter outside the application's scope
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: the explicit tally of consultation responses (consulted/support/objection/petition/comments) before the substantive assessment
“4.3 Policy DMD11 states that rear extensions should not exceed 3 metres in depth beyond the original rear wall in the case of terraced and semi-detached properties, or 4 metres for detached dwellings. 4.4 Policy DMD 11 also states that rear extensions should not exceed a line taken at a 45degrees from the mid-point of the nearest original ground floor window to any of the adjacent properties”
23/01353/FUL
“A representaon of objecon was made by the neighbouring property regarding (a), loss of light, (b) loss of privacy, (c) over development, and (d) too close to neighbouring fence. The legislaon governing the type of applicaon at hand allows for only the impact of the proposal on neighbouring amenity to be assessed”
24/00076/PRH
Measured from 242 published Enfield officer reports written by this officer, with recited policy boilerplate stripped before any counting. These describe how this officer works and writes — they are not outcome predictions. Every quote is from a named public report.
The policies this officer cites most in their own reports — times cited across 242 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.
Show all 20 rows
Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2022–26.[1] Click the map above to focus this page on a ward, or a row to open the ward.
- [1]Applications decided, approval rate, per-year trend and ward breakdown — London Borough of Enfield planning register and published decision notices, 2022–26. · methodology
- [2]Appeal overturn and decision-time benchmarks — Planning Inspectorate (PINS) appeal decisions and application date pairs; not yet computed per officer, shown as a dash until they are. · PINS appeals casework
- [3]Condition load — mean effective conditions attached to Enfield decision notices (grant/split), parsed from the published notice text; a borough figure, not yet split per case officer.
- [4]"How this officer decides", the policy playbook and all quotes — parsed from 242 published Enfield officer reports written by this officer, recited policy boilerplate stripped before counting; disposition text coded from their own reasoning with every quote machine-verified verbatim. Descriptive of how they work — not outcome predictions.