Agenda and minutes
Venue: M71, 7th Floor, Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG
Contact: Simmi Yesmin, Democratic Services Tel: 020 7364 4120, E-mail: simmi.yesmin@towerhamlets.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting, ensured that introductions were made and then briefly outlined the procedure of the meeting.
|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE To receive any apologies for absence. Minutes: There were no apologies for absence.
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST PDF 47 KB To note any declarations of interest made by Members, including those restricting Members from voting on the questions detailed in Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act, 1992. See attached note from the Chief Executive.
Minutes: There were no declarations of interest made.
|
|
To note the rules of procedure which are attached for information. Minutes: The Rules of Procedures were noted.
|
|
UNRESTRICTED MINUTES PDF 94 KB To confirm as a correct record of the proceedings the unrestricted minutes of the Licensing Sub-Committees held on 31st August, 7th September, 14th September, 21st September and 30th September 2010.
Additional documents:
Minutes: The minutes of the Licensing Sub Committees held on 31st August, 7th September, 14th September, 21st September and 30th September 2010 were agreed as a correct record of proceedings.
|
|
ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION |
|
Additional documents:
Minutes: At the request of the Chair, Mr Nick Kemp, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the review application for the premises license for Low Cost Food & Wine, 367 Mile End Road, London E3 4QS. It was noted that the review had been triggered by the Metropolitan Police and supported by Trading Standards.
At the request of the Chair, PC Alan Cruickshank, Metropolitan Police referred to his submission on page 64 of the agenda and explained that the review related to a series of operations run jointly with Police, Trading Standards and HRMC Customs. It was noted that certain off licences were identified following a review of intelligence from all three agencies. The premise was visited on 22nd April 2010, on entry to the premises, a total of 114 bottles of Glen’s Vodka were found, which displayed counterfeit duty stamps. Further examination of the wine on sale revealed that there were 435 bottles (326.25 litres) of mixed wine which were non duty paid, these were then seized. There had been no receipts produced for the goods at the time the goods were seized and the goods seized amounted to total duty evaded of £733.85 plus VAT.
Mr Cruickshank referred Members to the DCMS guidance which stated that the sale of smuggled tobacco and alcohol should be treated particularly seriously. However he advised Members that having had discussions with the Premises License Holder, Mr Shahidur Rahman and his Counsel and taking into consideration the information regarding the wholesalers and the receipts produced by Mr Rahman to show the frequent purchases of alcohol which are made and the fact that having investigated the authenticity of the Glen’s Vodka, and the help in identifying the problem, a agreement had been reached between parties to agree to a suspension of the alcohol license for a period of 12 days and various conditions to be imposed to prevent this from happening again.
Mr Stephen Bartlet-Jones, Counsel, accepted that Mr Rahman failed to keep receipts to prove purchase of goods and stated that the Police could disapprove Mr Rahman’s version of events as he does not have any evidence, but there was no evidence to say that it was not true.
Mr Bartlet-Jones assured Members that Mr Rahman would follow strict guidelines and also ensure that double copies of receipts would be kept, that UV lamps had already been installed on the premises and that all stamps on alcohol are checked when purchased, and that he would be more vigilant on the types of products he purchased. Mr Bartlet-Jones emphasised that the conditions which had been recommend, meet the concerns raised by the Police and Trading Standards. He also urged Members to reduce the period of suspension on the basis that the premises had no complaints since it was opened in December 2005, had successfully refused underage sales, and the premises had support from local residents. He stated that the business was in need of protection as it was the ... view the full minutes text for item 5.1 |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: This item was withdrawn from the agenda.
|
|
ANY OTHER BUSINESS THAT THE CHAIR CONSIDERS URGENT Minutes: There was no other business.
|