FCA authorised · FRN 724952 0117 325 0027Quote & buy →
Aipedia: Planning consultants
AI can help build and test viability appraisals and prepare for S106 negotiations, but wrong inputs and leaked confidential data are serious risks. Viability evidence directly drives affordable housing and contributions, so errors translate into large sums for clients.
Part of: AI in Planning consultants
In short
Planning consultants may use AI to draft viability reports, test appraisal sensitivities, summarise comparable evidence and prepare S106 negotiation notes. The risks are wrong or outdated inputs, formulas the consultant does not understand, and confidential land and cost data placed into AI tools without client consent. A flawed appraisal can concede more planning obligations than necessary, or lose a viability argument at appeal. Confidential client information engages confidentiality duties and UK GDPR. RICS-regulated consultants must also meet RICS PII Requirements v11. PI usually responds to negligent advice, subject to the wording.
Viability work combines valuation, cost, finance and policy. Consultants may use AI assistants to draft the narrative of viability assessments, summarise benchmark land value arguments, test sensitivities, check spreadsheets for errors and prepare briefing notes for S106 meetings. Some use AI to compare a council's viability evidence with the scheme appraisal.
The AI in planning consultancy overview sets out the rules that apply across planning work.
Viability appraisals contain the most sensitive information a developer has: land prices, option terms, build costs, profit targets and funding. Planning submissions are public, but much of this is shared in confidence. Putting it into a public AI tool can breach confidentiality obligations in the appointment or a non-disclosure agreement, and personal data in deal files engages UK GDPR. Check where the tool stores and processes data and whether inputs are used for training. The client's agreement should come first: see telling planning clients you use AI.
Illustrative scenario. A consultant uses an AI assistant to update a viability appraisal for an S106 renegotiation. The tool pulls a build cost figure from an older report in the conversation history and applies the wrong profit basis. The appraisal shows the scheme can bear a higher affordable housing proportion than it can, and the consultant concedes it in negotiations. When the error is found, the deed has been signed. The developer claims the cost of the extra obligations.
In another variant, an analyst pastes a client's land option terms into a public AI tool to draft a briefing note. The client discovers this and alleges breach of confidence. Even if no harm follows, the relationship suffers and the firm must explain its controls.
A quieter risk is lost argument. At an appeal on viability, an AI-drafted report that the witness cannot explain under questioning, or that contains an unsupported benchmark land value, can lose the point. The client then pays obligations it might have avoided, and looks to the consultant. For data claims, see GDPR and data breach cover within PI.
Negligent viability advice is professional negligence, and PI commonly responds subject to the terms. Disputes often turn on scope of duty: did the consultant advise on the whole negotiation, or provide a figure the client used? Apex's scope of duty guide for valuers explains the principle. Breach of confidence claims are usually within civil liability wordings, while data protection fines are commonly excluded.
Apex arranges PI for planning consultants who advise on viability and S106, and a broker can review how your policy treats AI use and confidential data. See also AI site appraisal and constraint checks.
Only with care and preferably with the client's agreement. Viability data is commercially sensitive and often shared in confidence. Check the tool's data handling, whether inputs are used for training, and the confidentiality terms in your appointment before uploading anything.
The consultant who issued or relied on the appraisal. AI can help test sensitivities and spot errors, but every input and assumption should be sourced and checked. PI usually responds to negligent advice claims, subject to the wording and scope of duty.
Breach of confidence is commonly within civil liability PI wordings, subject to the terms. Data protection fines and penalties are commonly excluded. A broker can check how your policy treats confidentiality and data claims linked to AI tools.
Planning consultants who are RICS-regulated must meet RICS standards and the RICS PII Requirements v11, in force from 1 July 2025. Those who are not RICS-regulated are bound by their own contracts and, for RTPI members, the RTPI Code.
Tell us about your firm and the work you do. A broker will review how your current PI treats AI-assisted work, or arrange new cover. No fee for a quote. Or call 0117 325 0027.
Start a PI quote Request a callbackApex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England and Wales, company number 07014570. This page is general information about how AI is used in the profession and how insurance may respond. It is not legal, regulatory or insurance advice on your circumstances, and it does not guarantee that cover will be available or on what terms.
