The Licensing Sub-Committee granted a variation to a premises licence for 83-84 High Street, South Norwood, SE25 6EA, allowing for extended hours for recorded music, late-night refreshment, and alcohol sales. The committee also granted a premises licence for 6 Beddington Terrace, Mitcham Road, Croydon, CR0 3HG, for off-premises alcohol sales, after an initial adjournment to allow for further information regarding a police investigation.

Variation to Premises Licence at 83-84 High Street, South Norwood

The Sub-Committee granted the application for a variation to the premises licence at 83-84 High Street, South Norwood, SE25 6EA. The application sought to extend the terminal hours for the playing of recorded music, the provision of late-night refreshment, and the sale by retail of alcohol. The proposed new hours were Sunday to Thursday from 11:00 am to 12:30 am, and Friday and Saturday until 2:00 am, with extensions to 2:00 am on bank holidays, the day preceding a bank holiday, Christmas Eve, and New Year's Eve. An amendment was made by the applicant, Thomas Kering, following discussions with the police licensing officer, which included a reduction to the originally sought permitted hours. The conditions attached to the current premises licence would remain in effect.

During the hearing, local residents Faith Oswell-Jones and Jenny Patel raised objections. Ms. Oswell-Jones, a resident living near the premises, expressed concerns about noise from music and patrons, littering of laughing gas cartridges and smashed bottles, and patrons congregating outside the premises. She stated that the issues had been raised with the police licensing team and the council's noise pollution team, but felt these teams lacked the capacity or out-of-hours service to adequately address the complaints. Ms. Patel echoed these concerns, particularly regarding broken glass and laughing gas canisters, and felt that a later licence would exacerbate the noise pollution and littering issues impacting local families.

Robert Sutherland, the applicant's agent, refuted the allegations of the premises operating outside licensed hours, stating that regular meetings with the police and noise pollution team had taken place since 2022 with no operational breaches. He highlighted that Temporary Event Notices (TENs) had been granted for many weekends since July 2023 without objections from the police or noise team. Mr. Sutherland also stated that there was a dispersal policy in place, smoking was not permitted outside, and drinks were not allowed outside the premises. He added that the ground floor was used for table service only, and music was played at a level conducive to conversation.

The Sub-Committee noted the concerns raised by objectors regarding litter and noise, and queried the premises' cleaning operations and noise reduction measures. The applicant's agent stated that the premises were a community establishment, encouraged cooperation, and that security staff monitored patrons. He also mentioned that the ground floor had soundproofing in the ceiling and that there had been no recorded incidents at the premises since 2022. The applicant offered an additional condition to ensure that any litter was swept from outside the premises at the end of each day.

After deliberation, the Sub-Committee resolved to grant the variation to the premises licence. The decision was based on the belief that it would be appropriate to promote the licensing objectives, particularly the prevention of public nuisance. The Sub-Committee considered the concerns raised by objectors but also noted the applicant's denials of breaches, regular engagement with authorities, and the absence of objections from Environmental Health or the Police. They also acknowledged the applicant's offer of an additional condition regarding litter.

Premises Licence Application at 6 Beddington Terrace, Mitcham Road, Croydon

The Sub-Committee granted a premises licence for 6 Beddington Terrace, Mitcham Road, Croydon, CR0 3HG. The application was for the sale by retail of alcohol off-premises, with proposed hours of Monday to Thursday from 8:00 am to 11:30 pm, and Friday and Saturday from 8:00 am to 12:00 am. This followed an initial adjournment requested on 22 January 2024, due to an ongoing police investigation into an alleged threat, which was considered relevant to the application.

At the reconvened hearing on 5 February 2024, an adjournment was again requested by Mr. Raj Boodhoo, legal representative for objector Mr. Sinnathamby, citing the ongoing police investigation. However, the Sub-Committee determined that no further adjournment would be granted, stating that the police had indicated their investigation was closed pending further information and that it was not the council's role to investigate police matters. They noted that the police, as a responsible authority, had not submitted representations on the application.

Representations were made by objectors Mr. Sinnathamby and Mr. Shabanathan, supported by a translator and Mr. Boodhoo. They argued that granting the licence would increase alcohol consumption, lead to health and safety issues, and negatively impact school children. They also highlighted the existing number of off-licences in the area, with a petition of 174 local residents submitted in objection. Mr. Shabanathan described experiencing anti-social behaviour, noise disturbance, and littering outside his home, which he felt would worsen with another licence.

The applicant's agent, Mr. Nira Suresh, stated that the applicant would promote the licensing objectives and adhere to conditions agreed with the police, including reduced hours. He suggested that the objections were based on business competition and that the litter and anti-social behaviour were not caused by the new applicant or premises, which had previously been a food takeaway business. The applicant agreed to ensure no beer, lager, or cider above 6.5% would be sold and intended to operate as a local convenience store, cleaning the vicinity for residents' benefit.

The Licensing Officer clarified that commercial need was not a factor under the Licensing Act 2003, and that representations must relate to one or more of the licensing objectives. The petition was not considered a relevant representation as it lacked text relating to these objectives. The premises were also not located in a cumulative impact area, meaning there was no presumption to refuse the application.

The Sub-Committee resolved to grant the premises licence, concluding it would be appropriate to promote the licensing objectives. Their reasons included noting that while concerns about noise disturbance and litter were raised, objectors had not made complaints to Environmental Health, and the police had not made representations. They also considered the applicant's assurances and agreed conditions, including reduced hours. The Sub-Committee noted that any proven link between the alleged threat and the premises could lead to a review of the licence by the police.