To elect a Chairman for the hearing.

Councillor JW Hope MBE was elected as Chairman for the Regulatory Sub-Committee hearing.

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor SPA Daniels.

To receive details any details of Members nominated to attend the meeting in place of a Member of the Committee.

Councillor P Jones CBE attended the meeting as a substitute member for Councillor SPA Daniels.

To receive any declarations of interest by Members in respect of items on the Agenda.

There were no declarations of interest made.

To consider an application for the variation of a premises licence in respect of the ‘Crown & Sceptre, 7 Sherford Street, Bromyard, HR7 4DL.’

The Regulatory Sub-Committee was convened in order to determine an application for a variation to the premises licence in respect of The Crown & Sceptre, 7 Sherford Street, Bromyard, HR7 4DL. The application was submitted in accordance with Section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003.

The Chairman introduced the Members and Officers and asked any interested parties to introduce themselves. He advised them of the hearing procedures and asked if any party required an extension to the 10 minute time limit for public speaking, no extensions were requested.

The Licensing Officer presented the report and advised Members that a copy of the applicant’s advertisement had been submitted to the Licensing Authority. He advised the Sub-Committee that the advert contained no reference of outdoor activities or non-standard timings. He also advised that the applicants had agreed to all of the conditions recommended by West Mercia Police.

In accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, Mr Mooney, representing West Mercia Police, addressed the Sub-Committee. He advised Members that there had previously been incidents of low level noise disturbance from the premises but that the agreed conditions would address any such issues.

In accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, Mr and Mrs Griffiths, the applicants, addressed the sub-committee. They commented on a number of issues, including:

• They had purchased the Crown & Sceptre 12 months ago with sitting tenants.
• The previous tenants had wanted to open the function room as a late night bar / nightclub.
• New management team now in the premise as well as a new chef.
• Want the Crown & Sceptre to be a family friendly, food based public house.
• Would like to open the function room for weddings, birthday parties and christenings.
• Do not want to open the function room for late night drinking.

The Licensing Officer noted that the public house and the function room would have different hours for licensable activity. He noted that this could be an area of concern.

In response to a question the applicant stated that the Crown & Sceptre did not have a car park but that a local shopkeeper had offered the use of his nearby car park for weekend events. They also stated that they were aiming to host a number of local events where cars would not be required.

The Sub-Committee retired to make their decision, the Senior Litigator and the Democratic Services Officer also retired to assist them with procedural matters.

RESOLVED

That the application for a variation to the premises licence in respect of The Crown & Sceptre be approved subject to the amended hours and the conditions detailed in the attached decision notice.

To consider a review of a premises licence in respect of the Commercial Hotel, 44 Commercial Road, Hereford, HR1 2BG.

The Regulatory Sub-Committee was convened in order to determine an application for a review of a premises licence in accordance with Section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003. The Review had been applied for by West Mercia Police based on the licensing objectives regarding the prevention of crime and disorder and the protection of children from harm.

The Chairman introduced the Members and Officers and asked any interested parties to introduce themselves. He advised them of the hearing procedures and then asked the Licensing Officer to present his report.

In accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, Mr James Mooney, representing West Mercia Police who had applied for the review, addressed the sub-committee. He made a number of points, including:

• The premise fell within the cumulative impact zone as outlined in the Council’s Licensing Policy.
• On 12 November 2010 an assault took place a short distance away from the premise. The 3 youths who had been arrested for the offence were all 16 years old and had been drinking alcohol in the Commercial Hotel prior to the assault.
• The 16 year old youths had not been challenged by the door staff on entering the premise.
• All 3 of the youths had made a statement to confirm that they had been drinking in the premises prior to the incident.
• The applicant had offered two voluntary conditions in 2009 and had stated that a minor variation would follow, the variation was never submitted to the Licensing Authority.
• In December 2010, West Mercia Police were notified that the premise had failed in a test purchase operation when a 16 year old female was served alcohol.

In accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, Mr Harrison, the premise licence holder, addressed the sub-committee. He raised a number of points, including:

• That he had 20 years experience in the Licensing Trade and managed 7 properties throughout the county, employing 105 members of staff.
• All staff were subject to a strict training regime with particular attention paid to under age sales.
• Staff challenge all patrons who appear to be under 21 years of age.
• The Commercial had been acquired in 2009 and was a local public house with a focus on weekend trade.
• SIA registered staff were employed.
• The events of the 13 November were disputed. The 3 youths had not been served alcohol in the premise although they had entered the premise before being refused alcohol.
• They had been in the bar for 15 minutes before leaving.
• One of the three youths involved in the incident returned to the premise where he was held by the door staff and handed to the police.
• In respect of the test purchase, the purchaser appeared to be over the age of 21 and was therefore not challenged.
• The girl used in the test purchase operation was served by 10 other premises.

In response to the issue regarding the test purchase operation, Mr Mooney confirmed that the test purchase operation had taken place in 10  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.