Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Agreed.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of Licensing Committee held on 14 May and 26 November 2024 be confirmed and signed.

None.

Councillor Howard declared that Meta Fried Chicken and Pizza was in her ward, but she did not have any interest in the business.

DECISION NOTICE

1. Aruthavarasa Sutharsan (“the Applicant”) applied for the variation of a Premises Licence on 10^th October 2024. for Meta Fried Chicken & Pizza, 640 Downham Way, London BR1 5HN (“the Premises”).

2. The application was amended by the Applicant and reserved on all Responsible Authorities on 22^nd October 2024. The Premises was currently licensed for late night refreshment on and off sales, between specified hours Monday to Sunday. The proposal was to vary the licence to include the sale of alcohol for consumption off the Premises for: 

11:00 – 01:30 Monday

11:00 – 01:30 Tuesday

11:00 – 01:30 Wednesday

11:00 – 01:30 Thursday

11:00 – 02:00 Friday

11:00 – 02:00 Saturday

11:00 – 01:30 Sunday

3. Representations were received from a Responsible Authority, the Police, and a written representation was received from a local resident.  These were on the grounds of the prevention of crime and disorder, prevention of public nuisance, and the protection of children from harm, and from the local resident, public safety.

4. The Licensing Committee held a hearing on 12^th December 2024 to consider the Application. An agent attended and spoke on behalf of the Applicant company and a legal representative attended and spoke on behalf of the Police. The local resident did not attend to speak to their written representations opposing the variations.

5. Shortly before the meeting the Applicant’s agent volunteered additional conditions, which, at her request, were circulated to all members of the Licensing Committee for consideration as part of their application at the hearing. When it was pointed out that some conditions offered were less stringent than the standard Police ones, she said the Applicant would accept whatever conditions the Committee chose to impose.

6. In making its decision the Committee has considered all the papers contained in the report pack together with the oral submissions and evidence presented on behalf of the Applicant and the Resident at the hearing. The committee has also considered the Council’s own Statement of Licensing Policy 2020-25 and the latest Home Office Statutory Guidance, revised in December 2023.

7. The Committee’s decision is to refuse the application in the terms submitted. Its reasons for refusing the application are as follows:

a.    The Committee notes the Premises are situated on Downham Way, a busy thoroughfare served by local bus routes, close to the junction of Baring Road, which has Grove Park BR Station. It is in a retail unit in a row of shops that have residential flats above and nearby roads leading off are wholly residential.

b.    The Committee took note of the evidence in the witness statement of PC Court an officer in the Safer Neighbourhoods Team (‘SNT’) for Grove Park Ward, who said:

·         Downham Way/ Baring Road is a recognised ASB Hotspot for SNT patrols and which the crime database shows lies in a high crime area.

·         Homeless people and others loiter in the area around the shops and the station, street drinking, begging, using drugs, and are the  ...  view the full decision text for item 3.

3.1      The Chair welcomed all parties to the Licensing Committee. She introduced those present and outlined the procedure to be followed for the meeting. She then invited the Safer Communities Officer to introduce the application.

            Introduction

 3.2     The Safer Communities Officer said this hearing was to determine the application for the variation of a premises licence made by Aruthavarasa Sutharsan in relation to the premises at Meta Fried Chicken & Pizza, 640 Downham Way, London, BR1 5HN. The application was received on 10 October 2024, but it was later amended and served on all responsible authorities on 22 October 2024. The application had been advertised in accordance with regulations.

3.3      During the consultation period, the Licensing Authority received two representations from members of the public. One was submitted by a landlord in the area, the other was submitted by the Police. Representations were not received from the licensing authority because conditions were agreed upon.

3.4      The Safer Communities Officer then outlined the options open to members when making their decision.

             Applicant

3.5      Ms Sherratt explained that she had only recently been engaged to represent the applicant and had little time to prepare for this hearing. She had contacted the Police who recommended that the application be refused which she considered to be unusual. They had not contacted the applicant so had not made their judgement with a balanced view.

3.6      Ms Sherratt said that there were already two premises selling alcohol on this row of shops; her client was, therefore, being disadvantaged. The applicant had worked in retail management all his working life, and was experienced in selling alcohol, cigarettes, and lottery tickets. He had never failed a test purchase, or received any complaints and he understood his responsibilities.

3.7      The applicant had managed the current premises for 2 years, selling late night refreshments. He had not received any complaints about the premises during this time and had applied for an alcohol licence to keep his business viable during these difficult financial times. He worked full time at the premises and wanted to provide security for his three members of staff.

3.8      There were already a raft of conditions on the licence for this business. In addition, the applicant had agreed to curtail alcohol sales until 11pm. Sales would not be later than any of the other businesses on that row. Ms Sherratt read out the extra conditions that she had recommended and explained that because of these conditions it would be easier for her client to uphold the licensing objectives than the other businesses in that row.

3.9      In conclusion, Ms Sherratt said that the raft of conditions would ensure that the applicant would uphold the licensing objectives, The objection from the Police was fundamentally floored and she recommended that members of the committee should scrutinise their evidence.

3.10    Councillor Howard said that the previous owner had been stabbed and seriously injured. She asked how the applicant would ensure that this did not happen again because there were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.