Agenda item

4.1     Introduction

 

The Chairman introduced the Members of the Sub Committee, Legal Adviser,

Licensing Officer, Democratic Services Officer and explained their respective

roles.

 

The Chairman advised that the Sub Committee would take into account the

merits of the application against the four licensing objectives: the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, prevention of public nuisance and the

protection of children from harm, in addition to the Home Office Guidance and

the Council’s Licensing Policy.

 

4.2     Procedure to be followed

 

The Legal Adviser referred to the procedure to be followed for the Hearing and those present wishing to make verbal submissions. There had been no requests from any other party to speak at the hearing. The procedure was as previously circulated to all interested parties with the Notice of Hearing. All parties had been sent an agenda.

 

4.3    The Council’s Licensing Officer’s Report

 

The reviewapplicationwasmade by the Police Licensing Officer, Devon and Cornwall Police Constabulary, which is a Responsible Authority, to review the Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003. The Police Licensing Officer had concerns of the behaviour and stability of the Designated Premises supervisor Mr Neil Homan, following an incident at the premises in February 2018, in which he was involved. The incident reflected that the licensing objective of the prevention of crime and disorder was not being promoted.

 

Thefulldetailsofthereview applicationaresetoutin thereportand appendices circulated with the Agenda.

 

When determiningthisapplication,the Committee isrequiredto take oneofa numberof steps onlyif itconsidersit isnecessary to do so topromotethelicensing objectives.  Thosesteps,whicharesetoutinSection52oftheLicensingAct 2003 areasfollows:

 

(a) tomodifytheconditions of thelicence;

(b) to excludea licensableactivityfromthescope ofthelicence;

(c)toremove thedesignated premisessupervisor;

(d) to suspendthelicencefor aperiodnotexceedingthreemonths;

(e) to revoke thelicence.

 

  Copies of the application and the current licence were circulated.

 

4.4     Address by Interested Parties

 

4.4.1   Applicant’s Representative

 

The Police Licensing Officer (PLO) showed CCTV footage of the incident and submitted that the case was unusual in that normal circumstances the Police would ask for the designated premises supervisor (DPS) to be removed. However, there are no other concerns, the DPS appears to have been doing a good job running the premises and there were no complaints regarding his management.

 

The Police considered the licensing authority should be informed of the matter in order that a decision can be made, whether to take any further action as referred to in paragraphs 11.17 and 11.19 of the Section 182 guidance as circulated with the agenda. Mr Homan was issued with a Caution by the Police following the incident which is now a spent conviction and he no longer needs to declare this. The PLO circulated a list of recommended additional conditions which would improve the running of the premises, particularly with the promotion of the Licensing objectives: the prevention of crime and disorder, and the protection of children from harm, and avoid a similar situation arising in the future. The Licensing Authority should consider whether this was a one off incident, and whether it would be concerned about the long term future of the premises. 

 

4.4.2   Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS)

 

 Mr Homan submitted that the incident involved the boyfriend of one of  the barmaids. He intended to hit the bar surface with the pool cue to warn the man and snap him out of his rage, but not the man himself. Unfortunately he accidently hit the man.                                 

 

Questions

               

In response to questions Mr Homan advised the man had been barred from the premises, and the barmaid was no longer an employee of the premises.

 

The PLO advised that Mr Homan had been informed of the national and local licensing guidance. The Panel would be justified in giving Mr Homan a written warning in accordance with paragraph 11.17 of the guidance. Should the Panel decide to remove Mr Homan as the DPS the Premises Licence Holder may not find another suitable DPS to run the Premises.

 

In response to further questions, Mr Homan advised that the man became aggressive towards him when he mentioned that the price of beer was expensive in another licensed premise in the town. Mr Homan was asked if he had been drinking and in a bad mood when the incident happened. Mr Homan replied that he was neither drunk or in a bad mood. He had returned to the premises in a good mood having won a pool match, and had only consumed a couple of drinks. Customers’ pool cues were often behind the bar because the premises is a big pool playing pub.

 

4.4.3   Representative of the Licence Holder

 

Mr George, on behalf of the Premises Licence Holder Enlighten Inns Limited

submitted that he had held the position of Area Stock Taker since 1999. The premises had a bad reputation with lots of issues until Mr Homan became the DPS. The premises has, since that time been managed as well as any other pub in the town, and it was a pleasure working with Mr Homan.

 

4.5   Summaries

 

The PLO summarised that Mr Homan had managed the premises well   since he had been the DPS. 

 

4.6   Adjournment

 

At this point the Committee adjourned to debate its decision

 

4.7   Decision

 

On reconvening the Chairman announced:

 

“Wehave verycarefullyconsidered all the writtenand verbal evidence and submissions from all theparties.  Three representations have been received from local residents in support of the premises stating the premises have been turned around since the current designated premises supervisor has been in place.

 

We acknowledge that the DPS has breached condition 8(b) on the premises licence. However, on theevidencethat we have read, and also heard at the Hearing today in support of Mr Homan’s good character, we consider there is insufficientevidence to take action against the DPS. After giving full consideration to the licensing objectives we are satisfied that Mr Homan remains as the DPS subject to the conditions of the licence being modified as circulated by the Police Licensing Officer to promote the Licensing objectives, and specifically that the DPS receives refresher training in relation to this matter, as follows:

 

1.Training for the DPS

 

·    Condition 8(b) on the premises licence states “Staff are trained to deal with potential situations in a calm and controlled manner with the emphasis on nipping the problem in the bud before it escalates.”

 

    Police request that Mr Homan receives refresher training in relation to this matter to ensure the condition is met.

 

    In addition, Mr Homan to receive training on the use of the CCTV camera.

 

2. Additional Licence Conditions

 

Prevention of Crime and Disorder

 

·    The DPS to receive training in the use of the CCTV system.

·    CCTV footage to be shown on request to the Police or a Licensing Officer.

·    When CCTV footage download is requested by the Police, this shall be supplied within 7 days.

·    Refresher training in respect of recognising signs of drunkenness, signs of drug abuse/dealing, the Challenge 25 Policy, and how to deal with potential incidents shall be completed by staff/DPS on a six monthly basis.

·    Records of staff training shall be kept on the premises for a period of 12 months, and produced to any representatives from the Responsible Authorities on request.

 

      Protection of Children from Harm

 

·    The premises shall operate a Challenge 25 Policy whereby any individual who appears to be under the age of 25 shall be required to produce an approved form of photographic identification.”

 

Rights of Appeal

 

This decision does not take effect until the period for making an appeal has expired, or if an appeal is made, until that appeal has been determined.  An appeal may be made

by the applicant for the review, the premises licence holder or any person who made relevant representations in relation to the application. 

 

If you wish to appeal you must give notice of appeal to the Clerk to the Justices at the South Devon Magistrates’ Court, 1^st Floor, Riviera House, Nicholson Road, Torquay TQ2 7TT, within the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which you were notified of the decision.

 

Should there be problems associated with the premises, the Council’s Environmental and Safety Department has powers under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to take action against statutory noise nuisances.