Agenda item
Gambling Act 2005 Application for a Premises Licence - Adult Gaming Centre for Future Leisure, 10 Brick Lane, London E1 6RF
Minutes:
At the request of the Chair, Ms Corinne Holland, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a new premises licence for an Adult Gaming Centre for Future Leisure, 10 Brick Lane, London E1 6RF. It was noted objections had been received from Officers representing the Licensing Authority and the Metropolitan Police.
The Applicant’s Legal Representative confirmed that the Applicant had taken over the premises of a former betting shop which it wished to convert into an Adult Gaming Centre. The Adult Gaming Centre would have slot machines, with stakes ranging from 10p to £200, which would be supervised by staff on the premises floor. The Applicant’s representative referred to the conditions put forward in appendix 2 of the supplement agenda and stated that the measures proposed were in consistent with industry standards and the Gambling Commission guidance. The Applicant’s representative stated that the documentation in the second supplement demonstrated how the Applicant would uphold the licensing objectives of ensuring crime and disorder was prevented and protecting vulnerable people from the harm of gambling. The Applicant’s representative stated that Mr Tresidder was an experienced operator with seven to eight other gambling premises in north and east London. He noted that the decision to grant a licence should be based on the Applicant satisfying the criteria and not be based on subjective opinions on the mores of gambling. He referred members to page 67 of the bundle and submitted that the objections raised by the Responsible Authorities were based on concerns that were not specific to the premises in question. He believed the documentation provided to the Sub-Committee would satisfy the concerns raised by the objectors.
The Sub-Committee noted the concerns expressed by the Responsible Authorities that the area had a high level of anti-social behaviour and the premises was located in a highly populated area close to several homeless centres and shelters, with many vulnerable people living in the locality. The police expressed concern about the premises operating for 24 hours and being a magnet for vulnerable people. The close proximity of the homeless shelters, whose residents would be drawn to gambling, was a particular concern. The Responsible Authorities noted the high number of incidences of violence and disorder in the area and the likelihood of further violence and disorder by vulnerable people who have lost money in gambling establishments. PC Perry accepted that the Applicant was an appropriate person to hold a licence but the application was unsuitable given the location of the premises. He said that despite the policies and procedures in place, such as the Challenge 25 policy, there was insufficient measures to protect vulnerable people. The Sub-Committee explored if a condition on having a security presence at the premises for 24 hours would be acquiesced, however, the Applicant noted that this was unlikely to be viable; security requirements would be subject to risk assessments.
In response to questions from Members, the following was noted:
· The Applicant reassured the Sub-Committee that people under 18 would not be permitted on the premises as staff on the shop floor would challenge anyone coming into the premises. Mr Woods stated that staff had been trained to spot vulnerable adults and challenge those who were seen entering the premise with alcohol.
· In response to how staff would be able to spot vulnerable people given the area’s unique composition of being highly populated with many homeless shelters, begging, mental health, drug and alcohol and anti-social behaviour and crime problems, Mr Woods referred the Sub-Committee to the second supplement and the information therein. He referred to the scenarios in the Intervention Guide and the Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults and Children guide and said the training packages had been developed over many years. Whilst there were challenges, staff would work to intervene at an early stage by speaking to customers and monitoring their behaviour.
· In response to how intensive the training given to staff was, Mr Woods said although they were not professional social workers, staff had basic training, as indicated in the guides, to look for signs of vulnerability of customers entering the premises. Mr Woods said under the Gambling Act, measures needed to be in place to protect the vulnerable and this had been done.
· The Applicant confirmed he had similar premises in Roman Road, Bethnal Green and in Kilburn High Street, Brent. However, he acknowledged that Brick Lane was different to other locations, given its character and socio-economic issues. He said that the challenges presented were not unique but similar in nature. He said that staff were trained to identify issues quickly and would be patrolling the shop floor to ensure vulnerable people were quickly identified and intervention took place.
· Mr Tresidder said that the need for security staff would be risk assessed and implemented if staff were in harm’s way or if the measure was otherwise required. Mr Tresidder said that placing a condition on the licence for 24/7 security was unlikely to be viable. He said he was not aware of any other Adult Gaming Centre having this type of condition placed on its licence. Mr Woods stated that the Applicant would agree to condition imposing a security requirement between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Both parties made closing remarks.
The Chair advised all parties that a decision would be made by the Sub-Committee once this meeting was over and a decision notice, including the reasons for the decision, would be sent out to all parties within five working days.
The Licensing Objectives
In considering the application, the Members were required to consider the same in accordance with the Gambling Act 2005, the Licensing Objectives, the Gambling Commission’s Guidance to Local Authorities and Codes of Practice, and the Council’s Gambling Policy with particular regard to the promotion of the three licensing objectives:
1. Preventing gambling from being a source of crime or disorder, being associated with crime or disorder or being used to support crime;
2. Ensuring that gambling is conducted in a fair and open way; and
3. Protecting children and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited by gambling.
Consideration
Section 153 of the Gambling Act 2005 provides that licensing authorities shall aim to permit the use of premises for gambling in so far as they think it in accordance with the relevant code of practice, in accordance with the guidance issued by the Commission, reasonably consistent with the licensing objectives and in accordance with the licensing authority’s statement of policy.
Each application must be considered on its own merits. The Chair confirmed that the Sub-Committee had carefully considered all the evidence before them and heard oral representations at the meeting from the Applicant’s Legal Representative and Officers representing the Responsible Authorities objecting to the application, with particular regard to crime and disorder and protecting vulnerable people being harmed from gambling.
The Sub-Committee noted that the Applicant had taken over the premises of a former betting shop which it wished to convert into an Adult Gaming Centre. The Sub-Committee noted all the measures carried out and planned by the Applicant to address the licensing objectives. It also noted that the Applicant was an experienced operator with other gaming centres in London.
The Sub-Committee noted the concerns expressed by the Responsible Authorities that the area had a high level of anti-social behaviour and the premises was located in a highly populated area close to several homeless centres and shelters, with many vulnerable people living in the locality.
The issue of security was raised with the Applicant who indicated that having security personnel present at all hours of operation was unlikely to be viable for the business. The Applicant offered to have security present between the hours of 10pm and 7am and to carry out risk assessments for the hours 7am to 10pm.
The Sub-Committee was particularly concerned about the risk of crime and disorder and risk of vulnerable people, particularly those with addiction or mental health issues, being harmed or exploited from gambling. It was noted that the area has unique characteristics including high levels of crime, anti-social behaviour, drug activity, homelessness and deprivation. The Sub-Committee believed that exceptional measures would be required in order to grant a premises licence for an adult gaming centre at the location given the number of vulnerable people and the severity of the issues experienced in the area. The Sub-Committee was not satisfied that the conditions proposed by the Applicant would adequately mitigate the risk of harm to vulnerable persons and the risk of crime and disorder. It concluded that the granting of the premises licence would not be reasonably consistent with the licensing objectives and that the objectives would be undermined if the proposed licence was granted.
Accordingly, the Sub-Committee unanimously:
RESOLVED
That the application for the premises licence under the Gambling Act 2005, for Future Leisure, 10 Brick Lane, London E1 6RF be REFUSED.
Supporting documents:
- BrickLa10, item 4.2 PDF 308 KB
- BrickLa10.Appx_Redacted, item 4.2 PDF 20 MB
- Future Leisure - AGC - Brick Lane, item 4.2 PDF 449 KB
- (c) Example Front Door, item 4.2 PDF 427 KB
- (d) Ent Sign 450x800mm, item 4.2 PDF 2 MB
- (e) Gamcareleaflet, item 4.2 PDF 369 KB
- (f) 4 Policies & Procedures, item 4.2 PDF 645 KB
- (g) 6 Social Responsibility Charter COC, item 4.2 PDF 266 KB
- (h) 7 Self Exclusion Guide, item 4.2 PDF 2 MB
- (i) Stay-in-Control-Poster, item 4.2 PDF 121 KB
- (j) Think-25-Arcade-A3-poster-1, item 4.2 PDF 164 KB
- (k) Think-25-Office-A3-poster, item 4.2 PDF 164 KB
- (l) StayingInControlleaflet, item 4.2 PDF 959 KB
- (m)12 gambleaware-intervention-guide, item 4.2 PDF 592 KB
- (n)13 Safeguarding in Gambling Training, item 4.2 PDF 450 KB
- (o) Letter to council re rep-KL20200707151630257, item 4.2 PDF 275 KB