Nurgul Kinli.
Active — last recorded decision May 2026
A case officer at Enfield with an approval rate of 74% across 145 decided planning applications, spanning 24 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×.
Kinli handles CEU (existing-use lawful development certificate) applications and is forensic about tenancy-continuity evidence, cross-referencing dated tenancy-agreement periods room by room against the statutory 4- or 10-year continuous-use test, and is prepared to refuse where the evidence trail has gaps rather than accepting a general assertion of continuous use.
· lists dated tenancy-agreement periods room by room, checking for continuous coverage across the statutory 4- or 10-year period rather than accepting a summary claim
· concludes on the civil standard ('on the balance of probabilities') explicitly when assessing whether a use has genuinely operated continuously
· for HMO clustering assessment, specifically distinguishes an 'immediate vicinity' test from a wider street-length test where the road is long
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: dated tenancy-agreement evidence covering EVERY period within the statutory 4- or 10-year continuous-use window, room by room, not just a general assertion
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: whether the evidence, assessed on the balance of probabilities, actually supports a continuous lawful use claim
· what this officer's reports consistently look for: the immediate vicinity of a site (not the whole street) when the road is long, for HMO clustering assessment
“The Local Planning Authority, having regard to its own evidence and in assessing the evidence submitted by the applicant, considers that, on the balance of probabilities, 32A Friern Barnet Road, London, N11 1NA has not operated as a large House in Multiple Occupation HMO (Sui Generis Class) for a continuous period of 10 years”
23/04158/CEU
“One other HMOs could be seen in the area, No. 42 Gordon Road. However, when considering the immediate vicinity given that the development belongs within a long stretch road none of the immediate neighbours have been converted”
24/03206/FUL
Measured from 112 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 112 parsed reports. Whether refusals citing each survive appeal isn't traced per policy yet.
Show all 24 rows
Where this officer's caseload concentrates, 2023–26.[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, 2023–26. · 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 112 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.