Built on authoritative data.
Every number in every report traces back to its source. If a planning officer asks "where did you get this?" -- one click.
Data sources
Every report draws from the same authoritative datasets that planning officers rely on. We query 130 distinct datasets across 11 categories in real-time for every site — no proprietary guesswork, no unverified estimates.
Environment Agency
Flood zones, surface water mapping, reservoir risk, historic flood events, flood defences, contaminated land register, and catchment data. The statutory flood risk authority for England.
British Geological Survey
Bedrock and superficial geology, borehole records, shrink-swell risk, landslide susceptibility, compressibility, dissolution, and radon data. The UK's geological authority since 1835.
Historic England
Listed buildings, conservation areas, scheduled monuments, registered parks and gardens, heritage at risk register. The government's advisor on the historic environment.
Natural England
SSSIs, SACs, SPAs, Ramsar sites, SSSI Impact Risk Zones, priority habitat inventory, National Nature Reserves, agricultural land classification. The government's advisor on the natural environment.
DEFRA
Air quality management areas, background pollution concentrations, noise contour mapping, environmental designations, and MAGIC Map data layers.
Ordnance Survey
Authoritative mapping, boundary data, land use classification, elevation models, and address data. Britain's national mapping agency.
Office for National Statistics
Census demographics, housing data, affordability ratios, population projections, and local area profiles.
Department for Transport
Traffic counts at 1,000+ monitoring points, STATS19 accident data, bus and rail timetables, and cycling infrastructure data.
HM Land Registry
Price paid data, comparable sales analysis, UK House Price Index, and ownership records.
Coal Authority
Historic mining activity, development high-risk areas, mine entries, and mining reporting areas across England's coalfields.
National Biodiversity Network
Protected species occurrence records and biological recording data from local environmental records centres across England.
Planning Data (DLUHC)
Local plan status and timetables, conservation area boundaries, Green Belt, Article 4 directions, and Tree Preservation Orders via planning.data.gov.uk.
Policy intelligence
We don't just report data -- we analyse what it means for your planning application. Every report is grounded in current planning policy, verified appeal precedents, and your council's specific requirements.
200+ quality checks, standard on every report
Every report passes through 200+ automated quality checks before delivery -- a systematic, automated verification of every data point, every calculation, every policy reference, and every case law citation. This is the standard on every order, within the 48 hours.
Every number traces back to its authoritative source. If a planning officer asks "where did you get this?", one click reveals the government data behind it.
Every constraint is cross-referenced against multiple data sources. Flood risk alone is checked against EA flood maps, surface water mapping, reservoir risk, historic flood events, and climate change allowances.
Every policy reference is verified against the December 2024 NPPF, relevant PPG methodology, and your site's local plan. We don't cite superseded policy.
CIL calculations are verified against your LPA's published charging schedule with correct indexation. Development economics use real comparable sales data, not estimates.
Numbers, conclusions, and recommendations are checked for consistency across all reports in the pack. A constraint identified in one report is reflected in every other.
Automated checks verify that narrative content matches the underlying enrichment data across 7 domains -- geology, flood, heritage, ecology, transport, demographics, and contamination.
Every appeal precedent cited in reports is verified against the original decision on BAILII and PINS databases. We don't cite cases that don't exist.
15 feasibility rules check that conclusions are consistent with the site's actual constraints. A site in Flood Zone 3 cannot receive a low flood risk rating.
All reports are validated for complete data population, correct formatting, consistent currency display, and proper table structure before delivery.
For clients who want extra assurance, an optional add-on provides specialist human review covering heritage significance, ecological sensitivity, highway safety, and viability assessment. It adds time beyond the 48-hour standard.
Optional human sign-off
Automated QA takes every brief to a defensible baseline: 200+ checks, standard on every order, built to the RICS standard on the responsible use of AI. For clients who want extra assurance, an optional paid add-on provides a named personal sign-off or a chartered-planner review. Because the reviewer reads the whole pack, it adds time beyond the 48-hour standard.
Chris Preston, BEng
Director and Founder · PF & Co Holdings Ltd
Structural engineer with 15+ years across UK infrastructure, central London residential, and structural consultancy practice work. Site shift engineer on Crossrail at Farringdon (infrastructure replacement, tunnels, ticket-hall finishing); ISG-era shopping-centre and commercial fit-out work; central London basement conversions and residential developments; in-house architectural CAD drafting for temporary and permanent works alongside architects and building control.
Founded PF & Co Site Intelligence after watching the same desktop due-diligence bottleneck from every angle — developer, architect, building control, heritage and consultant. The premise: if a developer can analyse ten sites for the price of five, they qualify out bad sites faster, get better shots at better projects, and look more invested to landowners on the good ones.
PF & Co Site Intelligence is not RICS-regulated. Where the sign-off add-on is taken, the reviewer (and, for triggered specialist domains, the relevant chartered panel member) is named on the report's issue sheet, so clients know exactly who has signed it off.
The four checks a sign-off adds
- Accuracy. Source citations, numerical precision, factual claims against the underlying datasets.
- Regulatory currency. NPPF and local-plan references checked against current numbering and dates.
- Professional appropriateness. Risk language, recommendations, and stated limitations match what the desktop method can defensibly say.
- Scope clarity. Where formal specialist reports, surveys, or sign-off are still needed, those triggers are flagged on the issue sheet.
Specialist sign-off panel
Most planning-stage reports do not require chartered sign-off. Where they do — ground investigation, ecology, transport, heritage, and others — we can arrange independent chartered review through our network of accredited consultants as a paid add-on. The specialist's name and accreditation appear on the report issue sheet, so you know exactly who signed off the section that matters. The panel is active and we are expanding it across more disciplines (see below).
- Independent. Panel members are not employees. Each is an independently practising chartered consultant in their discipline.
- Per-report engagement. Specialists are engaged on a per-report basis when the site triggers their domain — no retainer, no monthly minimum.
- Named on the issue sheet. Where a panel member has signed off a domain section, they are named on the report's issue sheet with their professional accreditation.
- Beyond the 48-hour standard. Your brief still arrives within 48 hours. Chartered review is an optional add-on that follows within a few additional working days, because the specialist reads the whole pack.
Chartered specialists, get in touch
We are expanding the panel across more disciplines and adding capacity. If you are a chartered consultant in any of the disciplines below and would like to take on independent per-report review work at competitive rates, get in touch. Reports come pre-drafted and pre-QA'd; your role is to review, sign off, and add a short professional note where relevant.
Per-report fees, paid on issue. No retainer. No exclusivity. Tell us your discipline, accreditation and a sample of recent work.
Governance & methodology
Constraint thresholds, data-source mappings and risk-scoring logic are documented, version-controlled and periodically reviewed. Every change is recorded with a date and a sign-off. Every output passes 200+ automated quality checks before issue; a named human sign-off is available as an optional add-on.
- Constraint thresholds. The numerical cut-offs that move a flag from green to amber to red — flood depth, distance to listed heritage, contamination tier, etc.
- Data-source mappings. Which dataset answers which question, including fallback ordering when a primary source is stale or unavailable.
- Risk-scoring logic. The weights, combination rules and exception cases that turn raw constraint hits into a site-level risk position.
- Report templates and language. The prose blocks, caveats and recommended-next-steps sets that the automated checks verify against at issue, and that a named reviewer reads against where sign-off is added.
- Statutory currency. NPPF, PPG and notable inspector decisions are tracked. When a paragraph or test moves, the affected templates and thresholds are reviewed in the next sprint.
- Cross-check against precedent. Outputs are reasoned against the 1,000+ verified appeal-precedent corpus, so risk language stays anchored to how inspectors have actually decided similar cases.
- Source freshness. Each dataset has a refresh window. The QA pipeline rejects the report if a source is older than its window without a documented exception.
- Automated gate at issue. The QA pipeline checks the final report against the issue checklist; a report that fails any critical check does not issue. Where the sign-off add-on is taken, the named reviewer also reads the pack and signs the issue sheet.
We do not claim "no algorithmic bias" because that claim is not defensible. We claim something narrower and verifiable: the same methodology runs on every site, the thresholds are documented, the logic is version-controlled, and where the optional sign-off add-on is taken, the reviewer is named on the issue sheet. Where a reviewer disagrees with a model output, the disagreement is recorded and feeds into the next methodology revision.
Professional standards
Our assessments follow the desktop methodology within established professional standards. These are the same data-led approaches used as the first stage of any planning assessment -- the methodology that statutory consultees expect to see.
Plus 150+ additional technical guidance documents from government bodies and professional institutions, referenced where relevant to your site's specific constraints.
Chartered sign-off available (optional extra)
If your submission requires documents signed by a chartered professional, we can arrange independent review and sign-off by accredited consultants — CGeol, MCIEEM, CIWEM, MCIfA, or MCIHT. You receive your reports within 48 hours so you can start using the intelligence immediately. Sign-off typically follows within a few additional working days.
Client data security
Your site addresses and project details are commercially sensitive. Here is precisely how we handle them under UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018.
Contract performance under UK GDPR Article 6(1)(b) — we process the site and project data you give us solely to produce the report you have ordered.
Your site addresses, project details, and report outputs are never used to train, fine-tune, or improve any AI model — ours or any third party's.
Contact form data up to 12 months. Order data 6 years (UK tax/accounting). Report processing data only for the duration of report production.
All client data processed on secure cloud infrastructure within the UK/EEA. Access is limited to the engineering team on a least-privilege basis.
Where we use third-party AI services we assess them against our data processing policies and security standards before connecting them to any client workflow.
A Data Processing Agreement is available on request for any regulated professional or corporate client that requires one. Email info@pfandco.co.uk.
The conversational AI widget on this site (ElevenLabs) loads from a pinned CDN version. If you send a message through it, ElevenLabs processes the message under their own Privacy Policy. Close the widget if you prefer not to.
Access, rectification, erasure, portability, and objection — all under UK GDPR. Email info@pfandco.co.uk. ICO complaints: ico.org.uk.
See it for yourself
Browse the full sample pack — every report we produce, across all four products, drawn from a real desktop assessment. Open any PDF, compare it against a site you know, and judge for yourself.
Scope & limitations
- --We're a desktop intelligence platform -- we tell you what the data says and what specialist surveys you need. We don't replace site visits, and we don't pretend to.
- --We're not a replacement for professional judgment on complex or politically sensitive sites
- --We don't produce site-visit surveys (protected species, tree surveys, ground investigation) -- we flag exactly which ones are needed so you don't waste money on unnecessary ones
- --We don't submit planning applications -- your architect or planning consultant handles that
- --Development costings are BCIS-informed desktop estimates, not RICS-compliant cost plans -- they identify site-specific abnormals at feasibility stage, not RIBA Stage 3+ detail
We produce the desktop intelligence that powers informed decisions -- at the right stage, before you commit capital.