93 authorities now in Presumption: the narrow window before plans catch up
The Housing Delivery Test 2025 measurement places 93 of 301 authorities below the 75% threshold, triggering S3 Presumption for applications they cannot otherwise justify against their development plan. That is 31% of measured authorities. This matters most in the short term: once a plan has been examined against the August 2026 Framework, Annex A(2) ceases to reduce the weight of its housing policies, and the Presumption — while still engaged — loses much of its practical force. Until then, every housing refusal in these 93 places must clear a higher bar.
The Annex A(2) clock is separate and authority-specific
Being in Presumption does not trigger the very limited weight rule in Annex A(2). That rule applies only where a development plan policy is materially inconsistent with a national decision-making policy — the DM codes, not the plan-making PM codes. The decision-maker must form that view on a policy-by-policy basis. Annex A(2) makes an exception for policies examined and adopted against the 2026 Framework, but it does not state a transition period for older policies that happen to align. A policy adopted in 2019 under a different framework carries reduced weight only if the authority or an inspector concludes it conflicts with a 2026 decision-making policy. Age alone is not the test.
The consequence: two authorities can both be in Presumption, but one may have a recently examined plan whose housing policies still carry full weight under Annex A(2), while the other is working with policies adopted years ago that an inspector might now treat as inconsistent with DM3 or S5. The HDT result does not determine this. It determines only whether S3 applies, and S3 tilts the planning balance — it does not downgrade individual policies.
Where the opening is largest
The 93 authorities in Presumption include some whose plans predate not only the 2026 Framework but several iterations before it. In those cases, a refusal must survive two challenges: first, that one or more housing policies should carry very limited weight under Annex A(2) because they conflict with current decision-making policy; second, that even if the policies carry full weight, the tilted balance under S3 favours the application. Our data shows 4,422 refusals across all authorities in the last 90 days, an 11.8% rate. Authorities in Presumption refusing housing on settlement boundary policies, restrictive countryside policies, or density caps adopted under earlier frameworks should expect those decisions to be tested on both grounds.
The 154 authorities meeting the HDT with no consequences, and the 19 in the buffer band requiring only a 20% supply addition, have a simpler task. If their plans are recent, Annex A(2) does not bite and S3 is not engaged. If their plans are old but they can demonstrate five-year supply plus the buffer and HDT delivery above 75%, Annex A(3) prevents a standard method figure higher than their adopted requirement from being treated as unmet need under S5(1)(j) — but only for five years from adoption, and only for that specific route into S5.
The timing advantage will not last
Every authority currently in Presumption with an old plan faces the same strategic question: how long until a post-2026 plan removes both the S3 tilt and the Annex A(2) risk? Once a plan has been examined against the August 2026 Framework and adopted, its policies are exempt from the very limited weight rule even if a future framework changes again. That makes the next 18 to 36 months the period of maximum exposure for most of the 93. Applications submitted now, in authorities where the emerging plan is at Regulation 19 or later, may be determined under the current adopted plan but appealed and decided under the new one. Applications submitted in authorities still gathering evidence face the longest runway under current policy.
What to do this week
- Cross-reference the 93 Presumption authorities against plan adoption dates: where a plan predates 2021, Annex A(2) arguments on housing policies are worth developing in detail. - On live applications in Presumption authorities, check whether the emerging plan is at examination: if so, the window for securing permission against the old plan is closing. - In authorities meeting the HDT, check the adoption date of the housing requirement: Annex A(3) runs for five years from adoption, and only where both five-year supply and 75% delivery can be demonstrated. - Review recent delegated refusals in the 93 for appeals where both S3 and Annex A(2) can be argued: a costs application is not justified by the Framework change alone, but a refusal applying an outdated policy as if it carried full weight may meet the threshold on other grounds.