Agenda and minutes

The Chair will open the meeting and welcome all present.

The Chair opened the Hearing and introduced the Members of the Sub-Committee and Officers present.  The Chair explained to all parties the procedure to be followed during the Hearing.

To receive apologies for absence and the details of any Councillor nominated to attend the meeting in place of a Member listed above.

Apologies for absence were received on behalf of Councillor Michael Chalk. Councillor Gay Hopkins attended the meeting as a substitute in place of Councillor Chalk.

To invite Councillors to declare any interest they may have in the item on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider an application for a Premises Licence for Life Styles Express, 17 Flyford Close, Lodge park, Redditch.

(Report attached)

The Sub-Committee was asked to consider an application for a new premises licence in respect of Life Styles Express, 17 Flyford Close, Lodge Park, Redditch. The application was subject to a hearing in the light of a number of representations which had been made by Ward Members and local residents. The basis of their representations related primarily to public nuisance and crime and disorder.

The Senior Licensing Practitioner introduced the report, noting that the applicant had paid the necessary fees and had complied with all the requirements of the Licensing Act 2003 over the advertisement of the proposals. Otherwise there was no further update to provide with regard to the application.

Mr Naga Rajesh, representative of the applicant, presented the case in support of his client’s application.  It was reported that the premises had been taken on by his client earlier in the year and his client had spent a very considerable amount of money re-opening a convenience store which had been closed for seven or eight years previously. It was stated that Mr Rajesh’s client was a personal licence holder, had traded for around 30 years and had a good track record in operating premises of this nature in a responsible manner

Mr Rajesh continued that his client was not seeking to obtain a licence to sell alcohol at unreasonable times and a number of measures were proposed to prevent the sale of alcohol to those who were intoxicated, causing problems or who were suspected of purchasing alcohol to supply to minors. It was suggested that the applicant was willing to have three members of staff managing the premises at any one time, would be instituting a strict Challenge 21 policy, had installed CCTV which operated 24 hours a day and was prepared to tag/mark the containers of alcoholic beverages sold on the premises.

The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to the fact that neither the Police nor any other of the Responsible Authorities had seen fit to object to this application. Indeed, Mr Rajesh contended that the objections raised about the application had related to the previous management of the premises when it had been trading a number of years previously. The premises would remain primarily a convenience store and there was the scope under the Licensing Act 2003 to control the operation of licensed premises which hadn’t existed under the previous regime.

Mr Rajesh made an application for the late submission of a petition in support of the application and for a witness in support of the application to be heard. These applications were discussed with the Other Parties to the hearing and, as they were not unanimously in agreement, the Sub-Committee declined the application.

Mrs Sooch, the applicant, briefly spoke in support of her application. She referred to the support that the management of the shop had from the local community now that the community had got to know the owners. The problems which had been experienced previously were said to have been caused by people  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.