Agenda and draft minutes

Resolved:     That Cllr Parker be appointed as Chair.

There were no declarations of interest stated.

The Licensing Sub-Committee carefully considered the application, the officer report, the legislation, Council policy and statutory guidance. The Sub-Committee also heard the representations from Staffordshire Police, the Council’s Environmental Health team and a local resident. The Sub-Committee finally considered the responses from the applicant and her aunt who was the lease holder of the premises. 

The Licensing Sub-Committee was being asked to consider the licence application on the grounds of prevention of crime and disorder, public safety and public nuisance. 

Resolved:     Thatthe licence be refused for the following reasons:

1. The Sub-Committee heard that the applicant, who had been involved in some capacity at the premises since April 2022, was making the application.  She was also managing the premises for her father on the day of the 7 May 2023 incident. The Sub-Committee felt that her aunt who was the new leaseholder of the premises, dominated the representations. 

2. In regards to the prevention of crime and disorder, the Sub-Committee did not feel that the applicant would be in charge of the premises as stated during the hearing, as the representations were made by her aunt rather than by the applicant who only responded when pressed.

The applicant herself had proven to be dishonest in her dealings with the responsible authorities. She took several months until she finally admitted her role in the premises to the police, in an interview. Even though she had taken the personal licence course she did not understand the requirements to hold a personal licence stating that she held one on several occasions before it was applied for.

The Sub-committee did not feel that she would make an effective Designated Premises Supervisor due to her lack of involvement in this hearing and in the written application itself.  She had not offered any measures to promote the licensing objectives within the operating schedule under the grounds of Crimes and Disorder.

3. In relation to the grounds of prevention of public nuisance, the applicant had been involved in the premises during the period of complaints and was aware of the complainant above the premises informing the Sub-Committee that he knew their name and that they regularly attended the premises. This information turned out to be not true, showing a lack of concern for the public nuisance objective and public nuisance associated with the premises.  The applicant had not engaged with the neighbours to address the problem or offered any suggestions and detailed solutions or measures to be incorporated into the operating schedule, which would address the licensing objectives.

4. In regards to public safety, it was noted that the main complainant in this matter outside of the responsible authorities was a vulnerable adult.  No enforceable measures had been suggested or put forward by the applicant in the operating schedule to meet this licensing objective.

5.  It was therefore the decision of the Licensing Sub-Committee to refuse this application for a new premises licence.