Agenda and minutes

The Licensing Panel considered the appointment of a Chairman for the meeting.

Resolved:

That Councillor Hutton be appointed Chairman for the meeting.

Members are asked to declare any interests in the items under consideration and in doing so state:-

(1) the type of interest concerned

(2) the nature of the interest concerned; and

(3) whether they have or have not sat on a Planning Committee which has previously considered a planning application in respect of a licensed premises which is also subject to consideration for a premises licence as part of the agenda for this meeting.

If any Member requires advice on declarations of interests, they are advised to contact the Head of Democratic Governance in advance of the meeting.

(Members are asked to also pay particular attention to the guidance sheet on interests supplied with the agenda).

There were no declarations of interest on this occasion.

The Chairman explained the procedure for the meeting including that an equal time limit of twenty minutes had been allocated for all parties.

a. APPLICATION AND REPRESENTATIONS SUBMITTED. To consider the attached report

b. DETERMINATION OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE REVIEW OF A PREMISES LICENCE- TAKEAWAY, 124 CENTRAL DRIVE

c. ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE DECISION FOR THE REVIEW OF A PREMISES LICENCE- TAKEAWAY, 124 CENTRAL DRIVE

The Licensing Panel considered an application by the Licensing Authority to review the Premises Licence issued in respect of 124 Central Drive known as Lilo Charcoal.

Mr Mark Marshall was in attendance on behalf of the Licensing Authority and made representation to the Panel. Mr Marshall highlighted the concerns of the Licensing Authority emphasising the prevention of crime and disorder, the employment of illegal workers and concerns regarding the disposal of waste. Mr Marshall emphasised that these were high risk premises for child sexual exploitation due to the location and opening hours and therefore required a strong management approach. Mr Marshall asked the Panel to note that Mr Bradost had only recently become the Premises Licence and in his opinion lacked the necessary experience nor was he was sufficiently separate from the previous operator.

Sgt Helen Parkinson was in attendance on behalf of Lancashire Constabulary and provided representations to the Licensing Panel. She highlighted the concerns of the Police which were similar to those of the Licensing Authority including previous issues with the premises, that Mr Bradost lacked management experience and that he had previously been involved in the premises when operated by the previous Licence Holder. She also highlighted that Mr Bradost had recently been arrested and would be charged with a serious offence. The Police also remained unconvinced that the premises would be able to adhere to the conditions on the Premises Licence regarding CCTV.

The Licensing Panel noted that representations had been received in support of the Review from the Child Protection Licensing Officer and Home Office Immigration but that neither of the responsible were in attendance. It agreed to consider their evidence based on the written representations.

Mr Bradost accompanied by his landlord Mr Raveshi was in attendance and made representations to the Licensing Panel. He highlighted that he was a new operator of the premises although acknowledging that he was still paying instalments to the previous operator. Mr Bradost highlighted that he wold operate the premises in compliance with conditions and that he had the skills required and suitable staff to operate the premises.

The Licensing Panel considered carefully the evidence submitted. It had serious concerns regarding the crime and disorder previously experienced in the premises. T considered by its nature and location that the premises could, without strong management, prove problematic.  It did not consider that Mr Bradost had the necessary experience and strengths to upload the Licensing Objectives. It therefore considered that the only way to ensure that the Licensing Objectives were not undermined was to revoke the Premises Licence.

Resolved:

That the Premises Licence in respect of 124 Central Drive be revoked.