The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting, ensured that introductions were made and then briefly outlined the procedure of the meeting.  

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence was received on behalf of Councillor Rajib Ahmed for whom Councillor Amy Whitelock substituted for.

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.

There was no declarations of interest.

To note the rules of procedure which are attached for information.

The Rules of Procedures were noted.

This item was deferred at the meeting and agreed to be considered at the Extraordinary Licensing Sub Committee on 28 November 2011.

This item was deferred at the meeting and agreed to be considered at the Extraordinary Licensing Sub Committee on 28 November 2011.

At the request of the Chair, Mr Nick Kemp, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a review of the premises license forBengal Village, 75 Brick Lane, London E1 6QL. It was noted that the review had been triggered by Trading Standards.

At the request of the Chair, Mr John McCrohan, Trading Standards Manager referred to his statement on pages 105-107. He explained that a test purchase was carried out at the premises where the test purchasers had been induced to enter the premises by a male tout. It was noted that the premises licence had a condition that stated that the premises will not knowingly allow any person by payment or otherwise to solicit for custom for that premises by offering inducements or other concessions. This condition was breached. It was noted that when the Licensing Officers went to the premises after the test purchasers had left, they met with one of the Premises Licence Holders, Mr Suhel Miah who behaved aggressively towards them, although at the end of the visit he apologised to them for his behaviour.

Mr McCrohan concluded by requesting the Sub Committee to suspend the licence for a period of time and to replace the current condition on Annex 2 of the premises licence with the two standard conditions in relation to touting. He also stated that the Premises License Holders were willing to sign up to the Anti-Touting Policy.

At the request of the Chair, Mr Muktar Miah, Licensing Representative for the Mr Imam Uddin, Premise Licence Holder, explained that management acknowledged what had happened and apologised for the incident, he explained that this was a one off incident as the business was suffering financial loss and had outstanding payments at the time and on that particular day the restaurant was empty and they had been approached by a tout who said he could fill the restaurant with customers. He concluded that it was the first time, they were sorry and this would not happen again and urged Members not to suspend the licence.

Mr Imam Uddin, apologised for the incident, stated that they had not employed touts since the test purchase and had learnt their lesson and believed to be unlucky to have been caught on the day.

In response to questions, Mr Uddin acknowledged his business partners behaviour and explained that his behaviour was due to stress as the business was suffering from financial loss. It was also noted that Mr Uddin was aware of the existing condition on the premise licence to not solicit for custom and that he was happy to accept the conditions proposed by Trading Standards.

The Chair advised that the Sub Committee would at 6.50pm adjourn to consider the evidence presented. The Members reconvened at 7.15pm. The Chair reported that;

Members carefully considered the representations made by the Trading Standards Service and Mr Miah and Mr Uddin. In particular, Mr John McCrohan provided evidence in respect of a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.3

At the request of the Chair, Mr Nick Kemp, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a review of the premises license forForty Fives, 45 Mile End Road, London E1 4TT. It was noted that the review had been triggered by Metropolitan Police and supported by local residents.

At this point Mr Nicolas Clark, Legal Representative for Ms Beata Johnson, former Designated Premises Supervisor, addressed the Committee and requested to speak on behalf of Ms Johnson. He stated that the statutory period of notice was not given and that they had not seen the advertisement. Mr Kemp explained that there had been an error in the display of the notice as it should have been advertised for the period until 31^st October and not until 28^th October, which is when the statement had been displayed till. It was noted that Ms Johnson had only contacted the office today to make a representation. Mr Clark explained that having seen the notice, Ms Johnson had thought that she was out of time and hence not contacted the office until today.

The Chair adjourned the meeting at 7.20pm to consider the request, they reconvened at 7.25pm.

The Chair asked if the applicant, PC Cruickshank and the representative on behalf of the Premises Licence Holder, Mr Brown, would accept this representation at such short notice. Both parties objected to this request. Mr Brown and PC Cruickshank confirmed that Mr Johnson was aware of the meeting details and had informed them that his wife would be attending the meeting.

In light of the objection the Chair did not grant the request by Mr Clark to speak at the meeting. However it was noted that Members would have the opportunity to ask questions of Ms Johnson if required.

At the request of the Chair, PC Alan Cruickshank went through his statement and explained that the removal of the DPS, Ms Beata Johnson was due to her lack of management, control and supervision which had led to the number of incidents and the review application. Mr Cruickshank expressed his general concern about the premises in terms of the current hours on the premises licence, non enforcement of conditions and the noise nuisance. He then suggested a reduction in hours for the licence and recommended a number of conditions which would help address the concerns he had raised.

At the request of the Chair, Mr Howard Spratt, resident objector explained that the level of noise was a major problem for him and local residents and that the building had no sound proof provisions as the premises had a glass shop front and therefore the building was extremely noisy with no management of sound.

At the request of the Chair, Ms Sarah Le Fevre, Counsel for Punch Taverns explained the history of the premises and accepted what had happened. She explained that in recent months her clients had been trying to contact Ms Johnson, however no contact was made. It  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.4

The Chair extended the decision by dates for the applications listed below to the following hearing dates;