Agenda and draft minutes

RESOLVED - that Councillor John Hart be appointed as Chairman.

None.

None.

The Chairman noted the procedure following an introduction of the Members of the Sub-Committee, the officers, licensee, public speaker and the Responsible Authority and Applicant.

The Sub-Committee considered a Review of Premises Licence for The Wallace, 1023 Finchley Road, London, NW11 7ES, together with submissions from the Licensing Officer, Responsible Authority and Applicant, licensee and public speaker.

RESOLVED - That the parties be excluded from the meeting, together with the press and public, in accordance with regulation 14(2) of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings and Regulations) 2005.

The Sub-Committee retired in private session, accompanied by the council’s legal and governance officers, to consider the facts of the application and the measures necessary (if any) to ensure the promotion of the licensing objectives.

The parties to the application were readmitted to the meeting and the Chairman conveyed the Sub-Committee’s decision as follows:

This was an application for a review of the premises licence under section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003 for the Wallace, 1023 Finchley Road, London, NW11 7ES.  The review had been brought by the licensing team who reported numerous occasions when the licensee had failed to adhere to its licence conditions.  The review application related to the licensing objectives of crime and disorder and public nuisance.  A number of complaints were received by members of the public largely based on breaches of the licence conditions. 

The Sub-Committee noted that the complaints related to a failure to adhere to condition 13, which states: ‘Doors and windows to remain closed except for ingress and egress’.  In addition, the Sub-Committee noted that there were several complaints related to the business operating past the hours permitted by the licence. 

The Sub-Committee also noted that the licensing team had on more than one occasion spoken directly to the premises licence holder and the DPS and in addition sent letters in order to address these complaints.  The premises licence holder stated that he had not seen these letters but Mr Pattenden confirmed that these letters had been sent to the DPS and the premises licence holder highlighting the gravity of the situation. 

The Sub-Committee noted that there was a history of complaints in relation to the premises concerning breaches of the licence conditions and noise nuisance. In particular, a complaint was received on 11^th July 2015 by the licensing team in relation to alleged breaches of the premises licence and in relation to condition 13.   Consequently, Daniel Pattenden, licensing officer visited the premises to discuss the licence and its conditions with the premises licence holder.  During the course of this meeting, it was explained to Mr Pouressemaeli that he had responsibilities under his premises licence and that he must adhere to the conditions placed on the licence at all times.  At this meeting, a letter was also handed to the premises licence holder highlighting the complaints and covering the matters discussed during the course of the meeting.

The Sub-Committee also noted that on 12^th May 2016 the licensing department received a further complaint from a member of the public alleging that condition 13 of the licence was being breached.  A further complaint was received from the same resident on 14^th May 2016 in relation to the premises operating past its permitted hours and further breaches of condition.  A letter was sent to Mr Pouressmaeli on 20^th May 2016 and an email on 23^rd May 2016 outlining the allegations.  However, no response was received.  During the course of the hearing, the premises licence holder stated that the email address was no longer in operation and so he had not received any emails.  Mr Pattenden however highlighted that he had sent letters to the premises and Mr Pouressmaeli’s home address.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

There were none.