Content

Notification of decision following a Licensing Panel hearing to
determine an application for the variation of a premises licence
under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003
 
PREMISES:    Il Bebo’s Restaurant, 62 Staines Road,
Hounslow TW3 3LZ
 
APPLICANT:  Mr Muneeb
Quadir
  
TAKE NOTICE THAT
on Tuesday 17th June 2025following a
hearing before the Licensing and General Purposes Sub Committee
(the “Licensing Panel” or
“Panel”),
 
HOUNSLOW COUNCIL,
as the Licensing Authority for the Premises,
RESOLVED as follows:
 
Decision
 
To Grant with
amendments, the application for the variation of a premises
licence for Il Bebo’s Restaurant, 62 Staines
Road, Hounslow TW3 3LZ, as follows:
 
Recorded
Music
Monday to
Thursday 11:00hours to 01:30hours
Friday and
Saturday 11:00hours to 02:00hours
Sunday
11:00hours to 00:00hours
 
Performance
of Dance
Monday to
Thursday 11:00hours to 01:30hours
Friday and
Saturday 11:00hours to 02:00hours
Sunday
11:00hours to 00:00hours
 
Late Night
Refreshment
Monday to
Thursday 11:00hours to 01:30hours
Friday and
Saturday 11:00hours to 02:00hours
Sunday
11:00hours to 00:00hours
 
Supply of
Alcohol
Monday to
Thursday 11:00hours to 01:30hours
Friday and
Saturday 11:00hours to 02:00hours
Sunday
11:00hours to 00:00hours
 
Hours
Premises are open to the Public:
Monday to
Thursday 11:00hours to 02:00hours
Friday and
Saturday 11:00hours to 02:30hours
Sunday
11:00hours to 00:30hours
 
Non-standard hours
New Years
Eve: from the end of permitted hours on New Years Eve to the start
of permitted hours on New Years Day
 
 
Conditions:
 
1)            
That the premises would install and maintain a
comprehensive CCTV system as per the minimum requirements of the
Hounslow Police Licensing Team. All entry and exit points would be
covered, enabling frontal identification of every person entering
in any light condition. The CCTV system would continually record
whilst the premises was open for licensable activities and during
all times when customers remained on the premises. All recordings
would be stored for a minimum period of 31 days with date and time
stamping. Viewing of recordings would be made available upon the
request of the Police or authorised council officer as soon as
possible and during opening hours.
 
2)            
That a staff member from the premises who was
conversant with the operation of the CCTV system would be on the
premises at all times when the premises were open. This staff
member must be able to provide a Police or authorised council
officer with copies of recent CCTV images or data with the absolute
minimum of delay when requested.
 
3)            
That all staff responsible for selling alcohol would
receive regular training in the Licensing Act 2003. Written records
of this training would be retained and made available to Police and
Council officers with the absolute minimum of delay when
requested.
 
4)            
That an incident log would be kept at the premises
and made available on request to an authorised officer of the
Hounslow Council or the Police. It had to be completed within 24
hours of the incident and would record the following:
 
a)            
all crimes reported to the venue
b)            
all ejections of patrons
c)            
any complaints received concerning crime and disorder
d)            
any incidents of disorder
e)            
all seizures of drugs or offensive weapons
f)              
any faults in the CCTV system
g)            
any visit by a relevant authority or emergency service.
h)            
any refused sales of alcohol
 

5)            
That notices would be prominently displayedat all exits
requestingpatrons to respectthe needs of local residentsand
businessesand leavethe area quietly.

 

6)            
That a Challenge 25 proofof age schemewould operate at the
premises. Signagewould be displayedadvising customers that the
scheme wasin place. All staffauthorised to sell alcoholwould be
trained in the Challenge25 scheme and thistraining would be
documented to include thedate the training was given, the nameof
the person who gave the training, theperson who received the
training andsignatures by bothtrainer and trainee.

7)            
That the licence holder would actively participate in any local pub
watch or retail watch scheme that was in effect.
 

8)            
That no deliveries would take place between 21:00 and 06:00
hours.
 

9)            
That no collections, including refuse and recyclable food waste,
would take place between 00:00 and 06:00 hours.
 

10)        
That all regulated entertainment in the outside area would cease by
00:00 Monday to Sunday, save for the playing of background music
only. 
 

11)        
That thee supply of alcohol for consumption at the premises had to
be to a person seated and primarily for the purposes of taking a
table meal there and for consumptionby such a person asancillary to
their meal.

12)        
That alcohol consumed outside the premises building would only be
consumed by patrons seated at tables.
 

13)        
That the supply of alcohol for consumption on the premises had to
be to a person seated and served by waiter/waitress service.
 

14)        
That a minimum of one Security Industry Authority (SIA)
registereddoor supervisor would be on duty on the premises between
the hours of 21.00hrs until half an hourafter closing on Friday and
Saturday.

15)        
That where SIA registered door supervisors were used at the
premises, a record had to be kept of their SIA registration number
and the dates and times when they were on duty

16)        
That staff ould regularly monitor the area out the front of the
premises in relation to keeping it clear of litter and to ensure
customers were not causing a nuisance to neighbouring premises.

17)        
That when SIA door staff were on duty they would monitor customers
as they left the premises and would make sure the dispersal wass
peaceful and quiet.

18)        
That last entry to the premises would be 01:00 on Sunday to
Thursday and 01:30 on Friday and Saturday.

19)        
That a copy of the premises’ dispersal policy and noise
management plan would be provided to the Licensing Authority prior
to the opening of the business.  A copy
of the premises’ noise assessment was to be provided to the
Licensing Authority no later than 3 months after opening the
business.
 
 
 
Reasons
 
 

1.          
The Panel convened in person to determine an
application by Mr Muneeb Quadir (the
“Applicant”) for a variation of a
premises licence for Il Bebo’s Restaurant, 62 Staines Road,
Hounslow TW3 3LZ (the “Premises”) under the Licensing
Act 2003. 
 

2.          
The Premises were currently licensed as shown by the
Premises Licence in Appendix B of the Agenda papers, and were
located in an area near the main High Street and with a mix of
commercial and residential properties.
 

3.          
In making its decision, the Panel considered
all the relevant information, including:
 

·       
Written and Oral representations by all the
parties

·       
The Licensing Act 2003 and the steps appropriate to
promote the Licensing Objectives

·       
The guidance issued under section 182 of the
Licensing Act 2003 (the “Statutory
Guidance”)

·       
Hounslow Council’s Statement of Licensing
Policy 2020-2025 (the “Council’s
Policy”)

·       
The Human Rights Act 1998
 

4.          
Both of the objectors were present, and the
Applicant was represented by Counsel, Mr Charalambides, and by his
Licensing Agent.
 

5.          
In making its decision the Panel noted that the
Premises was in the Authority’s cumulative impact zone, which
creates a rebuttable presumption that a premises licence would not
be granted where valid representations were received, as they were
in this case. The Panel noted that there was no representations
from the Police and no representations about crime and disorder or
public nuisance currently associated with the Premises.  However there was concern that the extension of
the proposed licencing hours and opening hours, potentially going
into the early hours of the morning, increased the risk of public
nuisance and crime and disorder. The Applicant’s Counsel
informed the Panel that the Premises would be a food led business,
which would also have shisha and be serving alcohol and there were
existing conditions in place whereby alcohol could only be served
to customers seated at a table and ancillary to a meal.  Therefore, the Premises would not be operating as
a bar.
 

6.          
The Panel listened to the objections of Mr Ahmed,
who did not think any extension of hours would be appropriate due
to the increased risk of public nuisance and crime and disorder,
noting there was a block opposite that had been converted from
office space to residential accommodation, and to nearby incidents
of crime, disorder and ASB.  In his
representations Mr Hennessy also thought the application should be
rejected but that in the event the Panel considered otherwise he
had put forward alternative proposed hours and
conditions.  When pressed by the Panel
at the hearing, Mr Ahmed indicated he was more likely to fall on
the side of Mr Hennessy proposed hours rather than the
Applicant’s.
 

7.          
Whilst Applicant’s Counsel noted that the
council’s master plan referred to making the town centre a
vibrant 24-hour hub, this did not negate the Licensing Authority's
duty to ensure any premises licence application was determined in
accordance with its legal obligations.
 

8.          
The Panel listened to Applicant’s
Counsel’s explanation that the Applicant was agreeable to the
licensing conditions proposed in Mr Hennessy's representation, save
for the proposed opening and licensing hours and save for condition
10, which required the use of the external area to be closed at
midnight Monday to Sunday.
 

9.          
The Premises were currently closed for refurbishment
and were due to reopen in and around August 2025 as a Lebanese,
food-led establishment.  It was also
clarified that the outdoor areas referred to in the application
referred to the structure at the front of the Premises, which
extended beyond the building located above the Premises, and that
the area marked as “external seating” on the existing
Premises plan was actually an internal covered area. The Panel was
informed that a revised plan would be sent to the Council once the
refurbishment had been completed.
 

10.      
The Panel was informed how the outdoor seating area
had large windows and a retractable roof, but that various acoustic
measures had been put in place to minimise the dispersal of sound
outside the Premises such as the use of sound deadening materials
and directional speakers, and that the Premises had a noise limiter
and that staff would also be monitoring the sound levels emanating
from the Premises to avoid disturbance. 
The Panel was informed that similar measures had been taken in
other premises run by the Applicant, some of which were in
residential areas, and so far there had been no noise complaints
made against them.  The Panel was also
told that the Applicant would be prepared to accept a condition
restricting the playing of regulated entertainment in the outdoor
area from midnight Monday to Sunday, save for the playing of
background music only.  In addition, the
Panel took into account the Applicant’s offer to provide the
licensing authority with a noise management plan prior to the
Premises reopening and also supply a noise assessment report within
three months after opening.  This was in
addition to providing the licencing authority with a copy of a
dispersal policy prior to reopening the Premises.
 

11.      
In relation to the issue of crime and disorder, the
Panel took into account that the existing conditions required the
use of a SIA door supervisor from 21:00 hours until half an hour
after closing on Friday and Saturday and again noted there were no
representations about crime and disorder issues associated with the
Premises. The Panel also noted the explanation given by
Applicant’s Counsel about a serious crime and disorder issue
at an associated venue in Brent.
 

12.      
The Panel also took into account the
Applicant’s proposed condition for a last entry time for the
Premises of 01:30 on Friday and Saturday and 01:00 hours for the
rest of the week, which the Applicant stated would allow for a
maximum capacity at 01:00, or 01:30 depending on the day, followed
by a gradually dispersion of customers after this time.  With the Premises only allowing alcohol to be
consumed at a sit-down table and with a meal, this would prevent
people seeking to enter the Premises only to drink
alcohol.  The Panel considered this was
a sensible condition to include on any licence in order to reduce
the risk of public nuisance and crime and
disorder.
 

13.      
Taking all of these issues into account, the Panel
was minded to agree that these particular Premises, with the
conditions regarding how alcohol could be consumed, with last entry
times, the use of SIA staff and the restriction of regulated
entertainment in the outdoor area from midnight, were unlikely to
add to the cumulative impact in the area. However, the Panel
considered that the proposed licensing hours and opening hours,
extending until 03:00 on Friday and Saturday and 02:00 on all other
days, including Sunday, were excessive, given these were very
sensitive times. The Panel considered that the hours proposed by Mr
Hennessy ought to be preferredin order to reduce the risk of public
nuisance.  These hours included the
termination of licensing activities at midnight on Sundays, with
the Premises to close 30 minutes thereafter. In this situation, a
last entry time of 01:00 on Sundays would appear to be irrelevant,
but the Panel is including this in the event that any non-standard
hours fall on a Sunday.
 

14.      
Furthermore, given the acoustic measures that were
proposed, the lack of representations about noise and disorder from
the Premises and the Applicant’s offer of conditions to
provide the licencing authority with its noise management plan and
its noise assessment report, the Panel was minded to agree the
Applicant’s submission not to accept condition 10 in Mr
Hennessy's proposed replacement conditions, namely to close the
external area at midnight. Instead, that condition 10 would be
replaced with the Applicant’s proposed condition to cease all
regulated entertainment in the external area by midnight Monday to
Sunday, save for the playing of background music
only.
 

15.      
Mr Hennessy's proposed conditions sought to replace
the existing conditions on the premises licence, although his
proposed conditions did not include retaining the existing
condition 8 which required staff to regularly monitor the front of
the Premises to keep it clear of litter and to ensure customers
were not causing a nuisance to neighbouring premises. The Panel was
of the view this was an important condition for the prevention of
public nuisance and should be retained. Furthermore, the existing
conditions required the keeping of a refusal's book at condition 12
and the Panel considered the proposed incident log in his proposed
condition 3 should be amended to include any refused sales of
alcohol.
 

16.      
The application also included a proposed condition
for SIA door staff to monitor customers as they leave the Premises
to make sure their dispersal was peaceful and quiet and the Panel
considered this condition should be retained.
 

17.      
The Applicant’s hours for seasonal variations
on New Year's Eve was not specifically discussed at the hearing,
nor was it specifically raised by either of the objectors, although
it could be implied that the general objection to the application
may suggest they were not in favour of this seasonal
variation.  However, the Panel decided
to accept the seasonal variation.
 

18.      
For these reasons, the Panel decided to grant the
application to vary the premises licence as amended and with the
licence conditions set out at the beginning of this
Decision.  For the avoidance of doubt,
these licence conditions are to replace the conditions set out in
Annex 2 of the existing Premises Licence.
 
Right to Appeal
 

19.      
Any party aggrieved with the
decision of the Licensing Panel on one or more grounds set
out in
schedule 5 of Licensing Act 2003 may appeal to the local
Magistrate’s Court within 21 days of notification of this
decision.