Agenda item
Application to Review the Premises Licence for Commercial Confectionery, 141 Commercial Road, London E1 4PX (LSC 039/910)
Minutes:
At the request of the Chair, Mr Mohshin Ali, introduced the report which detailed the review application for the premise licence for Commercial Confectionary, 141 Commercial Road London E1 4PX. It was noted that the review had been triggered by Trading Standards.
Mr McCrohan began by explaining that on two separate occasions, Trading Standards staff had seized tobacco products manufactured outside the European Union without both the United Kingdom fiscal mark and mandatory health warnings. He also explained that on four separate occasions, alcohol had been sold from the premises outside its licensed hours of; Monday to Sunday, from 09:00 hrs to 02:00 hrs.
It was noted that on 24th April 2009, 3680 Benson and Hedges cigarettes were seized under the Consumer Protection Act 1987; the cigarettes appeared to have been manufactured in Bangladesh. On 14th September 2009, another 1400 Benson and Hedges cigarettes were seized under the Consumer Protection Act 1987; once again the cigarettes appeared to have been manufactured outside the European Union.
Mr McCrohan briefly detailed the four separate occasions when alcohol was sold outside the licensable hours, on 19th August 2008 at 8.20am a bottle of Rose wine was sold to a Licensing Officers. Mr Amir Uddin, Premises Licence Holder, accepted a simple caution on 25th November 2008 admitting to the offence on 19th August 2008. On 22nd November 2008 at 02.10am Licensing Officers brought a bottle of red wine, on 20th December 2008 a bottle of Cobra beer was sold to Licensing Officers and again on 13th June 2009 at 03.16am two bottles of Smirnoff Ice was sold to Licensing Officers.
Mr McCrohan referred the Licensing Sub Committee to the guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003, in particular paragraphs 11.22 to 11.27, which states where there is certain criminal activity that may arise in connection with licensed premises, the secretary of state considers should be treated particularly seriously, and that revocation of the license should seriously be considered, even at first instance.
Mr Mcrohan concluded that in the opinion of the Trading Standards Service the sale of alcohol outside the time restrictions set out in the premises license; show that the Premises License Holder ignored his responsibilities under the Licensing Act 2003. Therefore Trading Standards Service respectfully submitted that the Sub Committee exercises its power under Section 52 of the Licensing Act 2003 and revoke the premises license.
In response to a members question it was noted that six warning letters had been sent to the Premises License Holder regarding the above incidents.
Ms Sarah Clover, Counsel for Mr Amir Uddin, Premises License Holder, stated that the review seemed somewhat out of the blue, as there had been no history of regulatory bodies working with the premises to help prevention. She acknowledged the seriousness of incidents however believed that revocation would be the ultimate sanction.
She then gave a brief background history of the premises, and highlighted the fact that Mr Uddin had been assaulted during April 2009 and as a result was hospitalised. This was when he had hired a temporary member of staff, Ms Nipa Begum to manage the shop during his absence and it was she who was responsible for the sale of imported cigarettes. It was noted that she was dismissed shortly after Mr Uddin returned to work and found out what had happened.
The second lot of cigarettes which had been seized were Mr Shuhel Mahmood’s (member of staff) cigarettes and were for his own personal use, they had been kept in the store room for him to take home but he had forgotten, and therefore these were later seized.
Ms Clover continued to explain that Mr Mahmood had been the person who had sold alcohol on two of the four occasions when there was sale of alcohol outside licensed hours. As a result of this Mr Mahmood had been given a final written warning and been sent on a training course. Ms Clover stated that these incidents had occurred while Mr Uddin was off work and therefore there was a loss of management control, however this was now resolved. The effects of revocation for Mr Uddin and his members of staff were noted.
Ms Clover, with acceptance from the applicant tabled photographs of the premises which showed notices that were displayed in the shop outlining the times when alcohol could be served. Ms Clover concluded by referring the Sub-Committee to relevant guidance and case law which supported her submission not to revoke the premises license.
In response to a councillor’s question, Mr Uddin clarified that the first seizure of the cigarettes was in April 2009 which was when he was unwell and not at work, and the second incident was when a member of staff had kept them in the premise for his personal use, however this was not known to Mr Uddin.
Ms Clover explained the steps that had been taken to resolve matters, ie. blanket ban on cigarettes from outside being brought inside the shop by staff, regular checks are to be carried out, staff to undertake regular training, and to display suitable signage highlighting the licensed hours for the sale of alcohol and to have shutters to conceal the alcohol display after the licensed hours.
The Chair advised that the Sub Committee would at 7.58pm adjourn to consider the evidence presented. Members reconvened at 8.25pm, the Chair reported that Members wished to ask further questions of the Premises License Holder.
Members expressed concerns over the number of times alcohol had been served outside the licensed hours and therefore asked Mr Uddin to confirm who had served customers on those four occasions; Mr Amir Uddin explained the following;
19th August 2008 – Mr Shuhel Mahmood (member of staff)
22nd November 2008 – Mr Shuhel Mahmood (member of staff)
20th December 2008 – Mr Jasim Uddin (member of staff)
13th June 2009 – Mr Jasim Uddin (member of staff)
It was noted that the majority of times it was because they did not see the time and as a result of this Mr Jasim Uddin had been dismissed.
Members also asked what measures were in place to prevent this from happening again, it was noted that shutters would be placed over the alcohol display when the licensed hours was not in operation, cigarettes from outside would not be permitted inside the shop by staff unless it was an opened packet. Mr Mahmood had been sent on a training course and all members of staff would also be regularly trained.
There were no further questions.
The Chair advised that the Sub Committee would at 8.30pm adjourn to consider the evidence presented. The Members reconvened at 8.40pm, the Chair reported that the Sub Committee had;
RESOLVED
That the Review application for Commercial Confectionary, 141 Commercial Road, London E1 4PX be GRANTED with the revocation of the licence for the sale of alcohol.
Reasons for Decision;
After hearing representations from both parties, Members reached the decision to GRANT the application and grant the revocation of the licence for sale of alcohol. Members noted the guidance that they were referred to by the Licensee's Counsel and also the guidance that they had been referred to by Trading Standards.
Members did consider the imposition of conditions to alleviate the strong concerns that they had about the numerous breaches of licensing and other legislation, but were not confident that conditions would resolve the issues.
In reaching their decision, Members were particularly concerned that the licensee had received numerous warnings and had even accepted a simple caution in relation to offences committed over a lengthy period of time.
Supporting documents:
- Commercial Confectionary Cover report, item 5.3 PDF 75 KB
- Commercial Confectionary Appendices Only, item 5.3 PDF 2 MB