Havant’s Planning System Crisis: What Residents Need to Know

In recent weeks, Havant Borough Council has faced a serious disruption in its planning services – one that’s directly affecting residents, buyers, sellers, and solicitors across the borough. House moves are stalling, property searches are delayed, and the ability to access historic planning data has been compromised.

In the absence of any communication from the council, this briefing by Havant Civic Society tries to explain what may have happened, why it matters, and what lessons must be learnt.

Background: The End of the Capita Era

For nearly a decade, Havant Borough Council was part of the “Five Councils Partnership”, a shared services arrangement with Capita that included Hart, Mendip, Vale of White Horse and South Oxfordshire. Capita provided a range of back-office services, including IT hosting for planning systems like Acolaid and Lalpac – legacy platforms used to manage planning applications, enforcement, and licensing.

This partnership formally ended in September 2025. Each council was responsible for managing its own exit strategy and procuring replacement systems. Havant chose Arcus Global, a cloud-based software provider offering a Salesforce-based planning platform.

The Arcus Decision

In December 2023, Havant’s Cabinet approved the procurement of Arcus Global’s Built Environment platform. The council stated that it had prepared a Full Business Case (FBC) using the Office of Government Commerce’s Five Case Model, though this document has not been published in full. The Arcus system was intended to modernise planning services, improve public access, and ensure continuity after Capita’s departure.

What Went Wrong

The implementation has deviated significantly from user expectations and almost certainly now exceeds the quoted contract value of £245,000 over five years which was, according to the Cabinet Record of Decision, for ‘the replacement software’ rather than for the total implementation cost. A seasoned IT professional would have advised that a 20% uplift should have been allowed for local customisation, together with a further 30 – 50% for the data conversion, migration and loading of the legacy planning content into the new system’s database. Additional to this is the oft-overlooked cost of user acceptance testing. Taking the realistic higher estimate for conversion, that would have raised the total implementation estimate to at least £440,000 excluding the cost of user acceptance testing, local staff training and operational support materials.

The core issue most probably lies with the specification of the procurement. If the council did not specify data migration and local customisation in their invitation to suppliers to tender a quotation, then those suppliers would only have quoted for what they were asked to provide – i.e. ‘the replacement software’. Also relevant to the specification is that the council appears to have ignored the requirements of the external stakeholders for whom the system, and its database, provides critical function. If HBC did not include the ‘use cases’ representing those external stakeholders (for example residents, solicitors, builders, architects and more), it is quite possible that the suppliers quoted for a system capable of supporting only the internal local authority user community.

However, what is abundantly clear to anyone accessing the new planning system is that when the council transitioned from Capita’s hosted legacy systems to Arcus, it failed to migrate the existing planning portfolio. These records are essential for conducting property searches, verifying planning conditions, and ensuring legal compliance during house sales.

As a result:

• Solicitors cannot complete local authority searches.
• Buyers and sellers face delays or cancellations.
• The council and external stakeholders, including residents, cannot easily access historic planning decisions, enforcement notices, or conditions attached to properties.

This is not a minor technical glitch – it’s a significant breakdown in statutory service delivery.

Is Havant Alone?

Other councils that exited the Capita partnership – such as South Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse – also adopted Arcus Global but appear to have managed the transition more smoothly. These councils began implementation earlier and share a joint planning service, which may have helped coordinate the rollout.

There is no public evidence that these councils are experiencing the same level of disruption. Havant’s problems seem likely to stem from:

• A late transition, with little buffer before Capita’s exit.
• Inadequate scoping of data migration requirements.
• Lack of contingency planning for legacy data access.

Impact on Residents

For residents, the consequences are tangible:

• House moves stall: Without completed searches, transactions cannot proceed.
• Planning uncertainty: Residents cannot easily check historic permissions or enforcement actions on their properties.
• Loss of trust: The council’s failure to deliver a core statutory function undermines public confidence.

This affects not just individuals, but the local housing market, conveyancers, and estate agents.

Governance and Accountability

The council’s decision to adopt Arcus was made through a Cabinet process, with reference to a Full Business Case. However, the lack of transparency around this document raises questions:

• Was the risk of incomplete data migration properly assessed?
• Were legal obligations around planning data retention considered?
• Did elected members fully understand the operational impact?

Residents have a right to know whether due diligence was performed – and whether lessons from other councils were ignored.

What Needs to Happen Now

Looking Ahead

Digital transformation in local government is essential, but it must be done with care, transparency, and accountability. Havant’s experience shows what happens when procurement is rushed, risks are underestimated, there aren’t appropriate skills and residents are left in the dark.

We must demand better – not just for today’s house moves, but for the integrity of our planning system and the future of our community. Havant Borough Council’s management of this procurement reflects the persistent dysfunction already evident within its Planning Services. With five different temporary executive leads in as many years, the department has lacked the continuity and strategic oversight necessary to deliver a complex system migration effectively. The result is a predictable failure rooted in unstable leadership and inadequate internal processes.

While this article relates only to the Arcus Global Planning solution implementation, we note that Havant Borough Council have also selected Arcus to support Environmental Health, Grants and Licensing functions.

This begs the question, have the legacy data requirements for those business implementations also been forgotten or underestimated?

---

Click in this box to read all HCS posts on this subject