meeting licensing sub-committee date and time: venue...

Date of issue: 5 January, 2010

MEETING LICENSING SUB-COMMITTEE (Councillors Bains (Chair), Davis and MacIsaac) DATE AND TIME: THURSDAY, 14TH JANUARY, 2010 AT 4.00 PM VENUE: MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM, TOWN HALL, BATH

ROAD, SLOUGH DEMOCRATIC SERVICES OFFICER: (for all enquiries)

SHABANA KAUSER 01753 875013

NOTICE OF MEETING

You are requested to attend the above Meeting at the time and date indicated to deal with the business set out in the following agenda.

RUTH BAGLEY Chief Executive

NOTE TO MEMBERS This meeting is an approved duty for the payment of travel expenses.

AGENDA

PART 1

AGENDA ITEM

REPORT TITLE PAGE WARD

Apologies for absence.

AGENDA ITEM

REPORT TITLE PAGE WARD

CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS

1. Declarations of Interest

(Members are reminded of their duty to declare personal and personal prejudicial interests in matters coming before this meeting as set out in the Local Code of Conduct)

2. Minutes of the Meeting held on 25 November, 2009

1 - 8

LICENSING ISSUES

3. Review of the Premises Licence for Murco Costcutter, 135 High Street, Chalvey, Slough

9 - 38 Chalvey

4. Review of the Premises Licence for Robbies Food and Wine, 101 High Street, Slough

39 - 68 Upton

5. Review of the Premises Licence for Fair Price Food and Wine, High Street, Slough

69 - 106 Chalvey

Press and Public

You are welcome to attend this meeting which is open to the press and public, as an observer. You will however be asked to leave before the Committee considers any items in the Part II agenda. Special facilities may be made available for disabled or non-English speaking persons. Please contact the Democratic Services Officer shown above for further details.

Licensing Sub-Committee – Meeting held on Wednesday, 25th November, 2009.

Present:- Councillors Shine (Chair), Dodds and Qureshi

Also Present:-

Miss Ali (Legal Services) and Mrs Kauser (Democratic Services)

PART 1

35. Declarations of Interest

None were received.

36. Review of the Premises Licence at Red Lion, High Street, Colnbrook. Following introductions, the Chair explained the procedure for the hearing and confirmed with all parties that they had received a copy of the paperwork. Introduction by the Council’s Licensing Officer The Licensing Officer introduced the report by stating that the Red Lion Public House operated under a premises licence which was held by Punch Taverns. Members were informed that in October 2009, Thames Valley Police had submitted an application for a review of the premises licence. The review related primarily to concerns regarding failing to promote the licensing objective relating to crime and disorder. Thames Valley Police also requested that consideration be given to attaching a number of additional conditions to the premises licence and that the premises licence be suspended until these conditions had been put in place. It was also brought to Members attention that the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) when the review application was submitted was Ms Williams. However, since the application had been made it was noted that an application for the variation of the DPS from Ms Williams to Mr Williams had been received. Questions to the Licensing Officer None. Representations by Thames Valley Police Mr Ferguson detailed as to why an application for a review of the premises licence had been submitted. Details relating to a number of crime and disorder incidents were outlined, the most serious of which occurred in August 2009. It was stated that the subsequent investigation relating to this incident highlighted that the DPS was not on site and that staff were unable to contact her. Furthermore it was noted that one of the conditions of the premises licence for the venue was that CCTV be installed to monitor both the interior and exterior of the building. It was reported that with no CCTV within the

AGENDA ITEM 2

Page 1

Licensing Sub-Committee - 25.11.09

premises this condition had been breached. Mr Ferguson also highlighted that the venue was not fully participating in the Pubwatch Scheme for the area. In view of the concerns relating to the venue, Members were requested to place a number of conditions on the premises licence, including a personal licence holder to be in attendance at all time when a licensable activity was taking place and for the management of the premises to become active members of the Pubwatch Scheme. Questions to Thames Valley Police Clarification was sought regarding CCTV at the premises and Mr Ferguson confirmed that this was only available in the car park of the premises. Mr Ferguson also confirmed that it had not been possible to contact the DPS following the incident in August 2009. Whilst accepting that attending PubWatch meetings was not a condition on the premises licence, Mr Ferguson stated that involvement with the scheme was essential to address issues of crime and disorder. Applicant’s Case Mr Phipps, representing Punch Taverns who held the premises licence for the venue, addressed Members of the Sub-Committee. Mr Phipps stated that since the review process had been initiated, a number of steps had been taken to address the concerns raised by the Thames Valley Police including the fact that the CCTV would be fully implemented at the premises imminently. It was also submitted to the Sub-Committee that a number of the incidents attributed to the premises by Thames Valley Police were unfair in that they had occurred outside of the premises and were not related to the management of the venue. In addition the current designated premises supervisor Ms Williams had already been removed and replaced by Mr Williams. Mr Phipps stated that although there were a number of failings and a clear room for improvement, any of the additional conditions proposed by Thames Valley Police had to be necessary and proportionate in terms of promoting the licensing objectives. Mr Williams also addressed the Sub-Committee and stated that he had attended a number of Pubwatch Scheme meetings and that failure to do so was not a breach of the premises licence as this was not a formal condition on the licence. In addition it was stated that work was currently being undertaken to ensure that CCTV would be fully installed within the next few days. Mr Williams also stated that he would ensure that his contact details were available to all members of his staff and that he would be contactable at all times when not at the premises. Summing Up All parties were given the opportunity to sum up. Mr Phipps stated that suspension of the premises licence would be disproportionate and that any

Page 2


conditions to be placed on the licence had to be necessary in promotion of the licensing objectives. All parties were then asked to leave the meeting to enable the Sub-Committee to deliberate. Decision All parties were asked to rejoin the meeting. Having carefully considered all of the information available the Sub-Committee decided

(a) A CCTV system be installed and working to the satisfaction of Thames Valley Police and the Licensing Authority.

(b) Recordings will be maintained for a period of 31 days.

(c) A notice will be displayed at the entrance to the premises advising that CCTV is in operation.

(d) At least one CCTV camera will be in operation at the front of the

premises at all times when the premises are in use.

(e) If the CCTV equipment fails, the Police and the Licensing Authority will be informed immediately by telephone and immediate steps will be taken to put the equipment back into working order.

(f) A personal licence holder must be in attendance from 1800 hours on

Friday and Saturdays until closing time.

(g) To be a member of Pubwatch and a representative to attend Pubwatch meetings and participate in all initiatives.

(h) All staff employed on the premises to undergo approved training in

relation to the sale of alcohol and to provide proof of such training.

(i) All staff at the premises, including the premises licence holder and the DPS, are to be instructed to fully co-operate with any police investigation relating to the premises.

(j) The DPS to be contactable at all times licensable activities are taking

place at the premises.

(k) The Sub-Committee also decided to issue the premises with a Yellow Card in accordance with central government guidance, due the seriousness of the incidents highlighted. It was noted that if a further review was necessary and matters had not improved, the premises licence may be revoked.

Page 3


The Sub-Committee considered that the conditions imposed on the premises licence were necessary, reasonable and proportionate to address concerns relating to the prevention of crime and disorder. The Sub-Committee also wanted to bring to the attention of the DPS the importance of fully adhering to all the conditions as set out in the premises licence and strongly recommended that the CCTV was fully implemented and operational by no later than 4th December, 2009.

37. EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC Resolved - That the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting as the items to be considered contain exempt information relating to individuals as defined in Paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

38. Private Hire Driver Conduct Hearing (Reference 09-09) The Chair welcomed all parties to the meeting, checked all had received the relevant paperwork and explained the procedure for the meeting. Licensing Officer In introducing the report the Licensing Officer stated that Appellant 09-09 held a Private Hire Drivers Licence which would expire in November 2010. Circumstances of the case were detailed and included the Appellant being stopped by Police at Heathrow Terminal 5 without displaying his Private Hire Drivers Vehicle plate and badge. Appellant 09-09 was convicted at Uxbridge Magistrates Court in June 2009 for failing to wear a badge and failing to display his plate. In addition, Members were informed that the Licensing Office had not been notified of this conviction within seven days, as was a requirement of Slough Borough Council Licensing guidelines. The Licensing Officer stated that, in her opinion, a suspension of the Private Hire Driver’s Licence would be an appropriate response in circumstances of the case. Questions to the Licensing Officer Appellant 09-09 queried as to how individuals were informed that it was a condition of their licence to inform the Licensing Office of a conviction/caution within seven days. The Licensing Officer stated that this was detailed within the information booklet given to drivers. Applicant’s Case Appellant 09-09’s cousin, addressed Members of the Sub-Committee and stated by apologising for the fact that the Appellant had not displayed his vehicle badge or plate when travelling to Heathrow Terminal 5 to pick up a customer. It was submitted that the vehicle had been taken for a car wash and that following this the Applicant’s brother had forgotten to put the vehicle plate back on the vehicle. In addition, Appellant 09-09 stated that he was not

Page 4


aware of the requirement of having to notify the council within seven days of a conviction being received. Questions to the Applicant A member queried as to why the vehicle plate had been removed in the first instance, Appellant 09-09 stated that he was not aware that once a vehicle had been licensed as a Private Hire Vehicle that the vehicle plate should not be removed. Summing Up Both parties were given the opportunity to sum up and the Licensing Officer stated that a suspension would be appropriate. Appellant 09-09 apologised for the events of January 2009 and stated that his licence should not be revoked. Resolved – That Appellant 09-09’s Private Hire driver’s badge be suspended for a period of two weeks.

39. Private Hire Driver Conduct Hearing (Reference 01-09) Clerk to the Sub Committee informed Members that the matter had initially been scheduled to be heard in August 2009 and that the Appellant had, through his solicitor, requested an adjournment in order to obtain character references. Members were concerned that in the absence of any contact from the Appellant and the recent postal strike that consideration of the above item be adjourned. Resolved – That Private Hire Driver Hearing (Reference 01-09) be adjourned.

40. Private Hire Driver Conduct Hearing (Reference 10-09) In the absence of any communication from the Appellant, consideration of the above item was adjourned. Resolved – That Private Hire Driver Hearing (Reference 10-09) be adjourned.

41. Private Hire Driver Conduct Hearing (Reference 11-09) The Chair welcomed all parties to the meeting and confirmed that all had received a copy of the paperwork. The procedure for the hearing was also outlined. It was noted that the Appellant was legally represented and had requested a translator, who was also present. Licensing Officer The Licensing Officer outlined details of the case and stated that Appellant 11-09 held a Private Hire driver’s licence which expired in August 2010. In March 2009, Thames Valley Police had contacted the Licensing Office, stating

Page 5


that Appellant 11-09 had been involved in an alleged assault. Following the incident in March 2009 and the subsequent investigation, the Appellant was charged under Section 4 of the Public Order Act 1986. It was brought to Members attention that although the case had proceeded to the Magistrates Court, it was later withdrawn and costs were awarded to Appellant 11-09. Questions to Licensing Officer. Responding to whether Officers were confident that the information collected from the Operator identified Appellant 11-09 as working , the process used to identify whether an individual was working was explained. It was noted that dockets collected from the operator showed that Appellant 11-09 was working on the evening the alleged assault took place. However, Members were informed that there was no docket specifically relating to the alleged incident. Furthermore, whilst the Operator maintained that no booking was taken for this particular job, the alleged victim’s telephone record showed that a call had been made to the operator. The Licensing Officer confirmed that there were no other incidents on Appellant 11-09’s taxi licensing file. Appellant’s Case. Mr Variatch, Appellant 11-09’s legal representative, addressed the Sub Committee and clarified that the Appellant had not been charged with assault. It was noted that Appellant 11-09 had held a private hire driver’s licence for over five years and that there had not been any incidents during this period. Appellant 11-09 stated that he usually worked the day shift (7am to 6pm) whilst occasionally working overtime until 10pm. Appellant 11-09 stated that he preferred to work the day shift as there was less likelihood of any difficulties. Appellant 11-09 stated that on the day the alleged incident took place, the last job he carried out was at 9.50pm and that he was at home shortly after 10pm; after which he did not leave the house. A reference letter from Appellant 11-09’s current employer was circulated to members of the Sub-Committee. In addition, a Criminal Records Bureau print out was also shown to Members, which confirmed that Appellant 11-09 had no criminal convictions or cautions. Questions to the Appellant Responding to why a driver from another company had identified the Appellant as being involved with the incident, Appellant 11-09 stated that he had not been formally identified by the other taxi driver and that he had only given a description of the attacker.

Page 6


Summing Up. The Licensing Officer reminded Members that they had to be satisfied that a private hire licence was only held by individuals who were ‘fit and proper’ persons to do so. In summary, Mr Variatch reminded Members that Appellant 11-09 had not been convicted of any criminal offence. Resolved – That Appellant 11-09 be given a written warning with regard to his future behaviour and conduct as a private hire driver.

Chair

(Note: The Meeting opened at 10.00 am and closed at 4.20 pm)

Page 7

This page is intentionally left blank

H/G&B/LI08/ms-sub-cttee front sheet

LICENSING SUB-COMMITTEE 14th January 2010

LICENSING ACT 2003 Murco Costcutter, 135 High Street, Chalvey

Review of Premises Licence – Number PL004528 Application made by Thames Valley Police

1. CURRENT POSITION Murco Costcutter operates under a premises licence which is held by Murco

Petroleum. The designated premises supervisor (DPS) at the time of the Review application being made was Mr Kanthan Nadanashanmugathasan. The DPS is responsible for the day to day management of the premises.

The premises licence authorises the sale by retail of alcohol (off sales), and the

provision of late night refreshment. A copy of the premises licence is attached at Appendix C.

2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION On 3rd November 2009 Thames Valley Police submitted an Application for the

Review of the premises licence due to the premises not being fully able to promote the licensing objective relating to the prevention of crime and disorder, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm.

The grounds for review can be summarised as the breaching of licensing

conditions by failing to maintain a CCTV system and that the mismanagement of the premises which has caused crimes, severe disorder, drunkenness and public nuisance. The grounds for review are detailed in full in the application attached at Appendix A.

3. APPLICATION – REVIEW OF PREMISES LICENCE The application requests that consideration be given to attaching additional

conditions to the premises licence and that the licence be suspended until the following conditions are in place;

1. A CCTV system be installed and working to the satisfaction of Thames

Valley Police and the Licensing Authority. 2. Recordings will be maintained for an appropriate period of time to be agreed

with the Police and the Licensing Authority, i.e. 31 days, and madet available to the police on request

3. If the CCTV equipment fails, immediate steps will be taken to put the

equipment back into working order. 4. A notice will be displayed at the entrance to the premises advising that

CCTV is in operation.

AGENDA ITEM 3

Page 9


5. The CCTV system should have coverage of the entrance of the premise, the service point of sale area and the area of the external service point of sale area, which is to have in place suitable lighting to enhance the quality of the CCTV capture.

6. A personal licence holder must be in attendance on site to supervise sales

between 2000 hrs and the termination of sales of alcohol.

7. To reduce the hours of sale of alcohol to 1000 hrs until 2300 hrs to prevent the reoccurrence of the crime and anti social behaviour occurring around the premise.

3.1 Thames Valley Police believe that for the licensing objectives to be promoted,

these matters need to be addressed, formalised and made accountable. 3.2 The Licensing Authority is satisfied that this application for review meets the

appropriate legislative requirements within the Licensing Act 2003 and is therefore a valid application to be considered by the Licensing Sub-Committee.

4. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED The remaining responsible authorities have not made representations in respect

of this application 5. RELEVANT GUIDANCE AND POLICIES 5.1 Reviews of premises licences represent a key protection for the community

where problems associated with the objectives are occurring. Where a request to review the licence is made by a Responsible Authority, the Licensing Authority will hold a hearing in respect of this, unless it, the applicant and the Responsible Authorities agree that a hearing is not necessary (p 11.1 of the Guidance issued by the Secretary of State under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 (as revised on 28 June 2007) ("the Guidance").

5.2 Paragraph 11.18 of the Guidance provides that:

"licensing authorities should ….. seek to establish the cause or causes of the concerns which the representations identify. The remedial action taken should generally be directed at these causes and should always be no more than a necessary and proportionate response."

5.3 Section 52 of the Licensing Act 2003 provides that the Sub-Committee must,

having regard to the review application and any relevant representations, take such of the steps listed below as it considers necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives. The steps are:

(a) to modify the conditions of the licence; (b) to exclude a licensable activity from the scope of the licence; (c) to remove the designated premises supervisor; (d) to suspend the licence for a period not exceeding three months; (e) to revoke the licence.

Page 10


5.4 However, the Sub-Committee may consider it is not necessary to take any of

the steps listed above to promote the licensing objectives. These are matters for the Sub-Committee to determine having regard to the evidence of all parties.

5.5 There is nothing to prevent a licensing authority issuing an informal warning to

the licence holder and/or to recommend improvement within a particular period of time. However, where responsible authorities like the Police, Environmental Health or Trading Standards Officers have already issued oral or written warnings requiring improvement, licensing authorities should not merely repeat that approach.

5.6 Suspension of the licence for up to three months could impact financially on

the business holding the licence and would only be expected to be pursued as a necessary means of promoting the licensing objective (paragraph 11.21 of the Guidance).

5.7 The Sub-Committee should also consider and make use of the ‘Yellow and

Red Cards’ system as directed and recommended by The Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS).

APPENDICES A Copy of Application for Review by Thames Valley Police B Statement of PC Nicholas Bond dated 15.09.09 C Copy of the Premises Licence D Statement of PC Sandra Beaumont dated 14.09.09 E Statement of PC Wendy Gibson dated 05.09.09 F Statement of PC Kevin Denman dated 11.10.09 G E Mail response from Cate Lynch dated 13.05.09 H Murco Costcutter, 135 High Street, Chalvey Background papers - The Licensing Act 2003 - Guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 - (Revised June

2007) - Regulations (cited as the Licensing Act 2003 ([Various]) Orders 2005 - Slough Borough Council statement of Licensing Policy - December 2007 - DCMS Guidance – Red and Yellow cards system Contact Officers David Turner Senior Licensing Officer 01753 477389

Page 11

SLOUGH BOROUGH COUNCIL

REPORT TO LICENSING SUB-COMMITTEE

LICENSING ACT 2003 – APPLICATION FOR A REVIEW OF THE PREMISES LICENCE FOR ROBBIES FOOD AND WINE, 101 HIGH STREET, SLOUGH

The application is by Thames Valley Police for a review of the premises licence for Robbies Food and Wine, 101 High Street, Slough. The licence authorises the sale by retail of alcohol for consumption off the premises at the following times: Monday to Sunday 08-00 hrs to 23-00 hrs. A copy of this licence is appended at Appendix “E”. The current premises licence holder is Mr Ranvir Singh Lalli. Mrs Namaljit Dhaliwal is the designated premises supervisor, and has been so since the 1st May 2009. The application has been made on grounds mainly relating to the sale of alcohol to underage persons, the maintenance of the CCTV system and the failure to comply with the conditions set out on the premises licence. The grounds for the application are fully set out in the application which is appended as Appendix “G”. A copy of a previous review in 2007 is appended at Appendix “F”. Copies of the statements of witnesses listed by the Police in the application are appended as Appendices “A” to “D”. The Guidance given by the Secretary of State is that the designated premises supervisor will normally be the person who has day to day responsibility for running the premises. The Police have requested that the following conditions be placed on the premises licence.

1. All persons authorised to sell alcohol shall be trained to the B11AB Level Award in Responsible Alcohol Retailing (ARAR) or any other similarly recognised nationally approved accreditation.

2. The premises licence holder or designated premises supervisor licence holder shall ensure that staff receive training on a regular basis in relation to the four licensing objectives contained within the Licensing Act 2003 for those authorised to sell alcohol. Written proof of all training shall be recorded and maintained.

3. The premises licence holder shall provide written training schedules and written confirmation from members of staff to the effect that such training has been given.

AGENDA ITEM 4

Page 39

4. The Designated Premises Supervisor, Mrs Dhaliwal is removed as DPS and be replaced by a person suitable to the Licensing Authority and Thames Valley Police.

5. If the CCTV system fails, the Police and the Licensing Authority will be informed immediately be telephone and immediate steps will be taken to put the equipment back into working order.

6. A notice will be displayed at the entrance to the premises advertising that CCTV is in operation.

7. At least one CCTV camera will be in operation at the front of the premises at all times when the premises are in use.

8. No single cans of alcohol to be sold. 9. That the DPS becomes a member of the “Slough Pub Watch”, and

to attend all regular meetings and if unable to do so, to appoint another person to represent them.

10. The Police request that the Sub Committee also suspend the Premises Licence for a period of time in order for the operator to consider his operation and to put in place measures to prevent a recurrence of the breaches described and to demonstrate to the operator the seriousness of selling alcohol to under age persons.

The Sub-Committee must have regard to:

• The Licensing Act 2003

• The Guidance given by the Secretary of State under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003. The Sub-Committee can decide not to follow the Guidance if it has reason to do so

• The Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy. The Sub-Committee must have regard to the Council’s policy but the overriding principle is that each application will be determined on its merits.

Human Rights Act 1998 Section 1 and Schedule 1 Parts 1 & 11 of the Human Rights Act 1998 apply: Article 1 – Every person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his or her possessions including the possession of a licence and shall not be deprived of the possession except in the public interest, Article 6 – That in the determination of civil rights and obligations everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law Options Available The Sub-Committee must take such steps (if any) as it considers necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives, which are: the prevention of crime and disorder; public safety; the prevention of public nuisance; and the protection of children from harm. The steps are:

Page 40

(a) To modify the conditions on the licence (b) To remove the designated premises supervisor (c) To suspend the licence for a period not exceeding three months (d) To revoke the licence (e) To issue an informal warning to the premises licence holder

The review provisions were included in the Licensing Act 2003 to ensure that there is an appropriate element of balance under the Act. Operators have been given greater freedom in the way that they operate their premises. The provision for reviews allows residents and businesses in the area of such premises, together with regulatory authorities, to voice their concerns should they feel that the premises are causing problems. Appendices Attached “A” Copy of statement from Jim Ferguson dated 16.09.2009 “B” Copy of statement from Jim Ferguson dated 25.09.2009 “C” Copy of statement from Dean Cooke, SBC dated 08.09.2009 “D” Copy of Statement from Dean Cooke SBC dated 07.10.2009 “E” Copy of Premises Licence “F” Copy of review application dated 17.07.2007 “G” Copy of review application dated 23.10.2009

Page 41

LICENSING SUB-COMMITTEE

14th JANUARY 2010

LICENSING ACT 2003 Fair Price Food & Wine, High Street, Slough,

SL1 1EL Review of Premises Licence – Number PL006046

Application made by Thames Valley Police

1. CURRENT POSITION Fair Price Food & Wine operates under a premises licence which is held by

Mr Paul Singh Gulati. The designated premises supervisor (DPS) at the time of the Review application being made was Mr Gurjit Singh. The DPS is responsible for the day to day management of the premises.

The premises licence authorises the sale by retail of alcohol (off sales only). A

copy of the premises licence is attached at APPENDIX A. 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

On 17th November 2009 Thames Valley Police submitted an Application for the Review of the premises licence due to the premises not being fully able to promote the licensing objectives relating to crime and disorder and protection of children from harm.

The grounds for review can be summarised as the breaching of licensing

conditions for selling alcohol to a minor. The grounds for review are detailed in full in the application attached at APPENDIX B. This application also contains a Statement from Dean Cooke – Trading Standards Officer APPENDIX C, a statement from Jim Ferguson – Thames Valley Police Licensing Officer APPENDIX D, a statement from PC Kevin Denman dated 23rd December 2007 APPENDIX E, a copy of an Application for a Review of the Premises Licence for the same premises dated 25th January 2008 as APPENDIX F, a copy of a letter sent to Mr Gurjit Singh dated 12th May 2008 as APPENDIX G and a copy of a letter written by Gerry Sutcliffe MP APPENDIX H.

3. APPLICATION – REVEW OF PREMISES LICENCE The application requests that the premises licence be revoked. The Licensing Authority is satisfied that this application for review meets the

appropriate legislative requirements within the Licensing Act 2003 and is therefore a valid application to be considered by the Licensing Sub-Committee.

4. REREPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED

The remaining responsible authorities have not made representations in respect

of this application.

AGENDA ITEM 5

Page 69

5. RELEVANT GUIDANCE AND POLICIES

5.1 Reviews of premises licences represent a key protection for the community

where problems associated with the objectives are occurring. Where a request to review the licence is made by a Responsible Authority, the Licensing Authority will hold a hearing in respect of this, unless it, the applicant and the Responsible Authorities agree that a hearing is not necessary (p 11.1 of the Guidance issued by the Secretary of State under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 (as revised on 28 June 2007) ("the Guidance").

5.2 Paragraph 11.18 of the Guidance provides that:

"licensing authorities should ….. seek to establish the cause or causes of the concerns which the representations identify. The remedial action taken should generally be directed at these causes and should always be no more than a necessary and proportionate response."

5.3 Section 52 of the Licensing Act 2003 provides that the Sub-Committee must,

having regard to the review application and any relevant representations, take such of the steps listed below as it considers necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives. The steps are:

(a) to modify the conditions of the licence; (b) to exclude a licensable activity from the scope of the licence; (c) to remove the designated premises supervisor; (d) to suspend the licence for a period not exceeding three months; (e) to revoke the licence.

5.4 However, the Sub-Committee may consider it is not necessary to take any of

the steps listed above to promote the licensing objectives. These are matters for the Sub-Committee to determine having regard to the evidence of all parties.

5.5 There is nothing to prevent a licensing authority issuing an informal warning to

the licence holder and/or to recommend improvement within a particular period of time. However, where responsible authorities like the Police, Environmental Health or Trading Standards Officers have already issued oral or written warnings requiring improvement, licensing authorities should not merely repeat that approach.

5.6 Suspension of the licence for up to three months could impact financially on

the business holding the licence and would only be expected to be pursued as a necessary means of promoting the licensing objective (paragraph 11.21 of the Guidance).

5.7 The committee should also consider and make use of the ‘Yellow and Red

Cards’ system as directed and recommended by The Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS).

Page 70

APPENDICES

A Copy of the Premises Licence B Copy of Application for Review by Thames Valley Police C Statement of Dean Cooke dated 06.11.09 D Statement of Jim Ferguson dated 13.11.09 E Statement of Kevin Denman dated 23.12.07 F Copy of Application for Review by Thames Valley Police dated 25.01.0 G Copy of a letter sent to Mr Gurjit Singh date 12th May 2008 H Copy of a letter from Gerry Sutcliffe MP

Background papers - The Licensing Act 2003 - Guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 - (Revised June

2007) - Regulations (cited as the Licensing Act 2003 ([Various]) Orders 2005 - Slough Borough Council statement of Licensing Policy - December 2007 - DCMS Guidance – Red and Yellow cards system Contact Officers David Turner Senior Licensing Officer 01753 477389 Melanie Sagar Assistant Licensing Officer 01753 875110

Page 71

meeting licensing sub-committee date and time: venue...

Documents