The Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Sub-Committee were scheduled to convene to discuss a review of the premises licence for Premier East Beach Stores. The review was prompted by an application from West Sussex County Council Trading Standards Service following a failed test purchase at the store. The sub-committee were also scheduled to discuss any late items added to the agenda.

Review of Premises Licence for Premier East Beach Stores

The sub-committee were scheduled to consider an application from the West Sussex County Council Trading Standards Service for a review of the premises licence held by Mr Pranay Patel for Premier East Beach Stores at 6 Orchard Parade, Selsey.

The application for review was made on the grounds that the store was undermining the licensing objectives of:

• prevention of crime and disorder
• protection of children from harm

According to the application, these concerns arose from a failed test purchase on 9 July 2025, where a staff member sold an e-cigarette to a volunteer under the age of 18. The application stated that this contravened the Nicotine Inhaling Products (Age of Sale and Proxy Purchasing) Regulations 2015 and the Children's and Families Act 2014, both of which prohibit the sale of nicotine inhaling products to those under 18.

The application also referenced prior intelligence from Sussex Police in April 2024, suggesting a similar incident had occurred, and an inspection by Trading Standards Officer Angelica Poole in October 2024, where advice was given to Mrs Hinal Patel, the owner, regarding age-restricted sales.

The Trading Standards Services suggested that possible outcomes of the review could include:

• The removal of Mr Mark Frederick Deacon as the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS). However, the report notes that Mr Patel had already submitted an application to remove Mr Deacon as DPS, replacing him with Mrs Patel.
• Inclusion of new conditions on the Premises Licence.
• Suspension of the Premises Licence for 3 months.

The report pack included a copy of the application for review made by Mr Peter Aston, Team Manager at West Sussex County Council Trading Standards Service, including the new conditions proposed by Trading Standards. These included measures relating to:

• CCTV installation and maintenance, in line with Home Office guidelines.
• Incident logs detailing crimes, ejections, complaints, incidents of disorder, CCTV faults and refusals of sales.
• Operation of a Challenge 25 policy¹ with prominent signage.
• Staff training on age-restricted sales, including refresher training every six months.
• Till prompts for age-restricted products.
• Storage and display of spirits behind a locked servery.
• Prohibiting offensive weapons and illegal substances on the premises.

Representations in support of the review application were received from Sussex Police and the West Sussex County Council Public Health Directorate. Sussex Police expressed concerns regarding the management's motives and the store's operations, stating they did not believe the premises were acting responsibly in preventing underage sales.

The Public Health Directorate stated they did not have confidence that the licensing objectives of preventing crime and disorder and protecting children from harm were being promoted. They highlighted the failure to apply a 'Challenge 25' policy robustly, despite prior advice from Trading Standards. They also raised concerns about the potential risk of harm to children from alcohol, given the evidence of age-restricted product sales.

The report pack also included a signed statement of Mr Mark Deacon, in which he stated:

I make this statement in connection with the application to review the premises licence as I think it is very important for the Committee to understand that I accept full responsibility for what has happened and am truly sorry. I sincerely apologise to the Committee, Trading Standards Team and Mr and Mrs Patel. It has been a salutary lesson, and I deeply regret it. It certainly will not happen again.

Mr Deacon's statement also noted that the store has a loyal local customer base and that refusals of sales typically averaged two per week, often related to tobacco or vapes rather than alcohol.

The sub-committee were reminded of the options available to them, including modifying the licence conditions, excluding licensable activities, removing the DPS, suspending the licence, or revoking it. They could also choose to issue a warning or take no action.