Stop “Following Up”: January Lead Revival for California Permit Expediters (Title 24, 2026)

January is when your backlog wakes up and starts acting like it has a deadline.

Not because people suddenly became decisive.

Because three clocks get louder at the same time:

1. The client clock: budgets reset, contractors reopen schedules, homeowners want a start date.

   
   

2. The city clock: intake is back, counters reopen, queues keep moving whether your client is ready or not.

   
   

3. The code clock: California’s next Title 24 cycle becomes real.

This year, that code clock is not vague. The 2025 California Building Standards Code (Title 24) takes effect January 1, 2026, and jurisdictions are already publishing notices and cutoffs. Some are explicit that incomplete submittals get rejected and must be updated to the new code standards.

For a permit expediter, this is not code trivia. It’s a clean, credible reason to re-open stalled conversations and move them into action.

Quick summary

If you only take three things from this post:

1. January revival is not “follow-up.” It is intake readiness plus decision control.

   
   

2. Use the January 1, 2026 Title 24 switch as a professional checkpoint, not a fear tactic.

   
   

3. Your fastest wins come from asking permit-native questions: jurisdiction, plan status, ownership, next step.

The Two Windows You’re Really Selling

Permit expediting sales gets easier the second you stop selling “a permit” and start selling what clients actually want.

They want a predictable start date, minimal surprises, and a clean path from today to approval. The permit is just the paper that proves it. In December, you’re not selling urgency. You’re selling a choice between two windows.

Window 1: Submit under the current code cycle

This is the “keep it as-is” window. For the right projects, it can reduce redesign, avoid documentation changes, and keep consultants from revisiting decisions that were already settled.

But it only works if the file is real. “We’re close” is not a file. A real file has:

1. A jurisdiction

2. A plan status that’s truly near complete

3. A clear revision owner

4. A path through intake acceptance

   
   

If those four aren’t true, squeezing into a window becomes a time sink. You’ll spend December chasing ghosts and still land in January.

Window 2: Submit under the 2025 Title 24 set (effective Jan 1, 2026)

This is the “move clean” window. Sometimes it’s the smarter decision, even if the client hates the idea of waiting.

If plans are early, contractor isn’t locked, engineering is still fluid, or the scope is still being debated, rushing a submittal is where rework is born.

A strong expediter doesn’t sell speed. They sell sequencing. Here’s the move that makes you sound like a senior, not a chaser:

“Are we truly in a position to submit cleanly this cycle, or do we want to line up a clean January push and avoid intake rejection and rework?”

That question does three things:

1. Protects the client from a messy submit

2. Protects you from being blamed for a rushed file

3. Turns follow-up into decision control

This is why December outreach works. You’re not “checking in.” You’re offering a controlled choice.

The Rework Tax

Permit expediters don’t lose money because a city is slow. They lose money because a file gets forced forward before it’s ready, then comes back with interest.

That interest is what I call the rework tax, It’s the hidden cost of “let’s just submit it” energy.

Because in permitting, a rushed submittal doesn’t just create comments. It creates friction across the entire chain: designer, engineer, energy documentation, contractor expectations, and client patience. Every time the file bounces, you pay in three currencies at once:

1. Time: extra emails, extra calls, extra coordination, extra resubmittals

2. Margin: you do more work for the same fee, or you discount to keep the relationship

3. Reputation: the client feels like progress is slow, even if the real issue was readiness

   
   

Submitting a half-ready package is like pouring concrete before the forms are braced. You might “move faster” for a day, but when it fails, you don’t just redo the last step. You break, clean, re-form, re-pour, and everyone argues about who caused it. That’s rework tax.

This is exactly why December is dangerous for expediters. Clients feel the year closing and they want motion. They confuse motion with progress.

But progress in our world is not “we uploaded it.” Progress is a file that can clear intake acceptance and survive the first round of review without collapsing under missing items, unclear ownership, or shifting scope.

This is also where Title 24 timing becomes a real sales advantage, without you turning into a code lecturer.

When the client is anywhere near the line between code cycles, the cost of rework goes up. A package that gets rejected, voided, or pushed out can trigger updates that ripple across the plan set. Even when the technical changes aren’t massive for a specific project, the operational reality is the same: new checklists, new forms, new documentation expectations, new reviewer focus.

So the real sell is not “rush before the date.” The real sell is sequencing:

1. If the file is truly near complete, ownership is clear, and intake readiness is tight, then pushing for the current cycle can reduce disruption.

2. If the file is still fluid, revisions are not owned, or the scope is still moving, then the smartest move is to prep cleanly and submit with control, even if that means lining up a January strategy.

This is how senior expediters sound different, they don’t sell speed. They sell fewer surprises, they don’t promise timelines they can’t control, they control what they can: readiness, ownership, intake acceptance, and clean resubmittals.

If you want your January pipeline to convert, treat December like preflight. Your goal is not to “submit more.” Your goal is to submit cleaner, so January produces approvals and starts, not comment cycles and blame.

That’s the difference between being busy and being profitable.

The data does not lie: January is the highest-reply month for outreach

January feels “busy,” but it’s busy in a useful way. People are back at their desk, priorities reset, and they’re more open to taking a quick call or answering a short question.

That matters because permit expediting is not impulse-buy sales. It’s decision-making under uncertainty.

A 2025 LinkedIn outreach study using Expandi performance data (analyzed by Belkins) reported January as the highest reply-rate month at 7.51%. That same dataset shows Q4 as weaker, with October 6.36%, November 6.43%, and December 6.44%.

In other words, prospects are statistically less likely to reply during the exact time many expediters keep “checking in.” Is that data permit-expediting only? No. But the behavior pattern maps perfectly to our niche: holidays and end-of-year wrap-ups suppress replies, and January re-opens the window.

How to use this without sounding like a marketer

1. In December, don’t fight for long conversations. Collect missing info and set up clarity.

   
   

2. In January, don’t “follow up.” Ask 2 to 3 permit-native questions that force the file to become real:

   
   

   1. What jurisdiction is it in?

   2. Plans drafting, near complete, or not started?

   3. Who owns the next revision right now?

When you combine a high-reply month with permit-native questions, you stop being “another person in the inbox.” You become the easiest path to clarity.

That’s the real January advantage. Not hype. Probability.

Why generic follow-up fails in our world

Most follow-up advice online is written for simple sales cycles. Permits are not a simple sales cycle.

Permit decisions usually happen when at least two of these are true:

1. The client has intent

2. The package is close to intake-ready

3. The timeline has a consequence

January gives you intent and consequence more often than any other month. Your job is to create intake readiness.

That is lead revival for expediters: you’re not “checking in.” You’re converting interest into an intake-ready file.

The 2026 Title 24 switch and why it revives dormant leads

Title 24 as a decision checkpoint, not a scare tactic.

The 2025 Title 24 code set becomes effective January 1, 2026.

Cities and counties are already publishing reminders, earlier cutoffs, and “complete package” language. The practical message is consistent: late-year submittals that are incomplete risk rejection, delays, or rework.

How an expediter uses this in outreach is simple:

“Quick heads up: Title 24 shifts January 1, 2026. If you want to avoid rework or intake surprises, we can sanity-check your jurisdiction and what your package needs to be accepted.”

One sentence. No drama.

That reads like a professional protecting timelines, not a salesperson pushing urgency.

The Intake Acceptance Myth and the Three Fixes

The most expensive lie in permitting is: “We submitted.”

Half the time they mean: “We uploaded something.”

Those are not the same thing.

Submission is an action. Intake acceptance is a status. In December, that gap gets wider because counters close, staffing shrinks, and incomplete packages get kicked back faster. Then everyone wakes up in January angry that nothing moved.

If you want your January pipeline to feel predictable, fix the three causes of “submitted but stuck.”

Fix 1: Make intake acceptance the definition of progress

Stop letting clients measure progress by uploads. Measure it by acceptance into intake and movement into review. Your wording matters:

1. “Has it been accepted into intake yet?”

2. “Is it in review, or still pending completeness?”

That’s how you sound like an operator, not a messenger.

Fix 2: Lock the missing pieces before you chase the client

Most stalls are not motivation problems. They’re one missing component that no one owns. Common killers:

1. Fees not ready

2. Missing forms or signatures

3. Wrong jurisdiction assumptions

4. Plan set not actually complete

5. Engineering responsibility unclear

6. Documentation not aligned to submittal timing

You don’t need to become a code consultant. You need a consistent intake readiness filter. In practice, your best December outreach is short and specific: city, plan status, revision owner, fee readiness.

Fix 3: Control ownership

A file with no revision owner is not a file. It’s a conversation.

When you ask “who owns revisions,” you’re preventing the most common failure mode: the client thinks the designer is revising, the designer thinks the contractor is revising, and the contractor thinks the client isn’t ready.

Ownership is the hidden lever that moves permits.

Why January creates a hidden surge for permit expediters

Permit expediting has its own seasonality most sales people miss. It’s not just construction cycles. It’s bureaucracy cycles.

Late December is rarely a clean operating period. Departments slow down, counters close, staffing shrinks, and earlier cutoffs appear. That creates a predictable pattern:

1. Owners procrastinate

2. Someone tries a late submittal

3. The package isn’t complete, fees aren’t ready, or intake rejects it

4. The file pauses

5. January hits and everyone suddenly wants a start date

This is why January lead revival works. You’re not manufacturing interest. Interest already exists. What’s missing is a clean path through intake.

The most insider move: talk about measurable permit demand like an operator

Most people online talk about demand like a feeling. In permitting, demand is measurable. The U.S. Census Building Permits Survey publishes monthly permit authorization data, including at the state, county, and place level. Two reasons that matters:

1. Permitting is a real economic engine, not a random hustle

2. January is not guesswork, it’s a planning moment in a market that is tracked and reported

   
   

Even though the effective date is statewide, intake behavior and timelines are jurisdiction-specific. That’s why “what city is this in” remains the fastest credibility signal in permit expediting.

The Intake Readiness Scorecard

Copy-paste checklist to qualify any dormant lead in under 2 minutes.

Before you chase anyone in January, confirm these six things. This is how you stop doing follow-up and start doing triage.

1. Jurisdiction: city vs county

2. Scope: ADU, TI, remodel, pool, grading, CUP, other

3. Plan status: not started, drafting, near complete, revisions

4. Ownership: who owns the next revision (designer, engineer, contractor, client)

5. Fees readiness: can fees be paid and can the package clear intake acceptance

6. Target date: what is driving it (lease, season, contractor schedule, budget)

If jurisdiction and plan status are unclear, it’s not a sales problem. It’s a readiness problem.

The January Revival Framework

Four backlog buckets that match real permit reality.

Do not treat your backlog like one list. Treat it like triage.

Bucket A: Quoted, then stalled

Reality: they got overwhelmed by commitment or unclear scope.

Your job: re-open the decision with one constraint question.

Prompt ideas:

1. “Was the stall timing, budget, contractor alignment, or scope clarity?”

2. “If it’s timing, what month are you aiming for?”

Bucket B: Scope discussed, never submitted

Reality: plans are floating and responsibilities are unclear.

Your job: confirm plan ownership and readiness in two questions.

Prompt ideas:

1. “Are plans drafting, near complete, or not started?”

2. “Who owns drawings and engineering right now?”

   
   

Bucket C: In plan check, corrections pending

Reality: they are losing momentum inside comment cycles.

Your job: act like a traffic controller.

Prompt idea:

1. “Send the latest correction list. I’ll point out the 2 to 3 items that usually block approval and the clean sequencing.”

   
   

Bucket D: No response

Reality: you were deprioritized, not necessarily rejected.

Your job: keep the relationship and regain timing clarity.

Prompt idea:

1. “Should I circle back in early January, or is a later month better?”

This segmentation alone makes your outreach sound like it came from an expediter, not a generic sales playbook.

A real file example

What lead revival looks like when it actually works.

This is a January pattern you’ll recognize immediately:

A lead goes quiet in Q4 after a quote or a “we’ll submit soon.” Then the first week of January they reappear with a schedule question:

“Can we start work in February?”

“Can we be approved by March?”

“Contractor is opening up. Where are we at?”

That’s not a new lead. That’s a stalled file resurfacing because the client’s timeline just became real.

And when they say “We submitted already,” they usually mean one of two things.

Scenario 1: Uploaded, but never accepted into intake

In December, “submitted” often means “we uploaded something before the holidays.” But intake acceptance is a status, not a feeling. If it wasn’t accepted, review never started.

Operator tells: They can’t produce an application number, portal status, or fee receipt. They speak in screenshots and assumptions.

Your triage (fast, professional):

1. What jurisdiction is it in, and do you have the application or permit number?

2. What does the portal show right now: incomplete, pending intake, deemed complete, or in review?

3. Are fees paid and receipted, or still pending?

4. Was there an intake email listing missing items?

How you add value without doing free labor: “Send the portal status screenshot or the intake email. I’ll tell you what gate you’re stuck at and what has to happen first.”

That’s the point. Not solving their entire package. Naming the gate.

Because once you know the gate, the fix is usually boring but expensive when missed: fee payment, missing form, signature, wrong application path, missing attachment, wrong version.

Scenario 2: Accepted, but stalled in plan check

This is the other silent killer. The file is “in review,” but it’s not moving because corrections are floating with no owner and no sequence.

Operator tells: They have a correction list, but nobody can answer “who’s driving revisions” or “what’s the next submission.”

Your triage (the questions that expose reality):

1. What date was the last correction list issued, and what is the current plan check status?

2. Who owns the next revision right now: designer, engineer, or contractor?

3. What is the next required action: resubmittal, revised calcs, response letter, or fee?

4. What deadline actually matters: contractor start window, lease, or budget release?

How you add value without doing free labor: “Forward the correction list. I’ll identify the 2 to 3 approval blockers and the clean sequencing so you don’t resubmit twice.”

Again: you’re not doing design for free. You’re preventing the most common waste, which is out-of-order resubmittals and partial responses that trigger another round.

The revival takeaway

January revival is not “more follow-up.” It’s one thing: Turn vague status into an owned next step.

Multi-channel coverage in January

Email alone is not a revival strategy.

Permit expediters win January when they stop treating follow-up like a message, and start treating it like coverage.

1. Email: best for details, attachments, correction lists, intake requirements, and paper trail

   
   

2. Phone calls: best for re-opening decisions, clarifying ownership, booking the next step

   
   

3. SMS: best for binary questions, confirmations, and closing loops

Email makes you look organized.

Calls create movement.

SMS closes loops.

The 6 numbers that tell you if your pipeline is real before January hits

Most permit expediters don’t have a lead problem. They have a visibility problem. The backlog feels busy, but you don’t know what’s alive.

Track these six weekly from mid-December through January:

1. Contact rate: how many dormant leads you actually reached

2. Reply rate: replies predict revenue more than opens

3. City captured rate: if you don’t have jurisdiction logged, you don’t have a file

4. Plan status clarity rate: drafting vs near complete vs not started

5. Ownership clarity rate: who owns revisions

6. Intake readiness rate: how many leads can realistically clear intake within 30 days

The December Revival Offer That Doesn’t Feel Salesy

Most expediters either over-explain or under-ask.

Over-explain looks like a long email nobody reads. Under-ask looks like checking in, which gets ignored. The sweet spot is a tiny offer that creates momentum and feels genuinely helpful. Here’s the offer: a 10-minute Revival Check.

What you ask for

Ask for low-friction info first:

1. City or jurisdiction

2. Scope of work

3. Plan status (drafting, near complete, submitted, not started)

What you give back

Three bullets, max:

1. The clean next step

2. The biggest risk

3. The fastest path to submit or resubmit cleanly

That’s it.

It works because it’s easy to reply to, obviously useful, not salesy, and tailored to their situation.

Where Permits Pipeline fits

Permit expediting businesses don’t lose January because they lack leads. They lose January because the founder or senior staff gets swallowed by delivery, and follow-up becomes “whenever we have time.”

Permits Pipeline is built to protect that front end for California permit expediters:

1. We revive dormant leads sitting inside your CRM

2. We qualify using permit-native filters

3. We book calls your team actually wants to take

If January is your annual surge, we make sure it hits like a controlled wave, not a chaotic flood,.

By the way, we run a limited-time introductory discounted offer for new permit expediter partners. To see it, go to our Services page, scroll a bit, and you’ll find the intro offer. Submit the form and we’ll reach out.

FAQ

Is the new California Title 24 code cycle effective January 1, 2026?

Yes. The 2025 California Building Standards Code (Title 24) takes effect January 1, 2026.

Do cities actually enforce earlier cutoffs?

Some jurisdictions publish earlier dates tied to holiday closure and intake realities, and some reference deadlines around December 24.

What does “deemed complete” typically mean?

It usually means the agency has enough required items and fees to accept the application package and route it into review.

Does the energy code change matter too?

Yes. The 2025 Energy Code becomes relevant for permit applications on or after January 1, 2026.

Should expediters use the code change as urgency pressure?

No. Use it as a credibility-based checkpoint: avoid rework, avoid intake surprises, map the clean route.