To consider a report of Head of Elections, Licensing and Registration which sets out details of an application for the review of a Premises Licence under
Section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003, sought by West Yorkshire police in respect of Worlds Ends, Booths Yard, Pudsey, Leeds, LS28 7AB.
The licensing authority is now under a duty to review the premises licence held by these premises.
The report of the Head of Elections, Licensing and Registration informed Members of an application to the review of a premises licence under Section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003, sought by West Yorkshire Police in respect of Worlds End, Booths Yard, Pudsey, Leeds, LS28 7AB.
The report provided Members with the background and history to the making of the review application by West Yorkshire Police at Appendix A of the submitted report.
The West Yorkshire Police informed the Members of the frequency of attacks at the premises and the lack of co-operation by the Licence holder and the DPS with the Police were the reasons that they had asked for the review to take place.
They listed a number of incidents at the premises these included:
· Over intoxication of customers
· Failure to call the Police
· Customer with a broken eye socket
· Not able to access or view CCTV
· Not calling Police when a firearm had been discharged
· Positive indication of drugs used in the premises
· Serious assaults with and without weapons
West Yorkshire Police had set out all the incidents at pages 16 to 19 of the submitted report.
The West Yorkshire Police Licensing Officer was at the meeting and informed the Members that she had experienced an incident first hand, she went on to explain the circumstances of the visit and what had occurred. She informed them that after this incident it had been explained to Mr Neave the Licence Holder that she would arrange an Action Plan meeting.
The WYP Licensing Officer informed the Sub-Committee that Mr Neave had also head the Licence to Trinity nightclub in Pudsey. He had employed the current DPS of the Worlds End at that nightclub prior to the review of that premises. She said that Mr Neave had been told that in their view Mr Paul Allen was not safe to run either Trinity or Worlds End.
The Members were informed that West Yorkshire Police had tried on numerous occasions to make contact with Mr Neave but had received no response. Finally an Action Plan meeting had taken place where all the issues were listed. The WYP Licensing Officer said that only 1 action had resulted from the meeting and that was the employment of two door staff on a weekend.
The WYP Licensing Officer informed Members that Mr Neave had advised her that his daughter Taylor had taken the course for a Personal Licence and had applied for the licence and was to take over as the DPS of the Worlds End.
The WYP Licensing Officer requested for conditions to include that CCTV be relocated in the Kitchen of Worlds End and for non-standard timings to be withdrawn. She also informed the Committee that Mr Neave had changed his address without informing the Licensing Authority. Therefore all paperwork had been sent to the wrong address for Mr Neave and this was only noticed when speaking to Taylor at the premises which she looked as if she was running.
Members noted that no paperwork had been received by the Licensing Authority from Mr Neave’s daughter applying for a Personal Licence.
Mr Neave the Licence Holder was at the hearing with his DPS Mr Paul Allen.
Mr Neave informed the Sub-Committee that he had added more cameras to his CCTV and had employed door staff. He said that employing door staff had put financial constraints on his business. He had relocated the CCTV in the kitchen area although he was of the view that it would be better locked away out of sight.
Mr Neave went on to explain that there had been a family fall out between his daughter and himself and that he had also got divorced and moved out of the family home and had mistakenly not informed the Licensing Authority.
Mr Neave informed the Members that Paul Allen was still the DPS. He said that Paul had difficulty getting across to the public and that he was still learning the role.
Mr Neave spoke about the night that the firearm was discharged saying that he had not heard it as he had been in bed. He said that no charges had been brought and he was of the view that it was not the same person who had been in the Worlds End earlier that night.
He explained to the Sub-Committee that he had closed down Trinity because of all the trouble. He said that Pudsey was bad for trouble but that since he had employed door staff there have been no serious incidents at the premises. He said that there was two door staff employed Friday and Saturday nights and also bank holiday Sunday.
Mr Neave said that he and Paul deserved a chance to run the pub. He said that during the day the pub was full of nice old men but that in the evening the clientele changed. He said that it was not the same set of people that came in the pub.
He informed the Members that he had been unable to get the CCTV required for financial reasons but this had now been installed as requested by the Police.
Mr Neave informed the Members that the pub was not his only source of income and that he worked away a lot in demolition. He advised Members that he had been receiving counselling due to an incident at a demolition site.
Mr Neave informed the Members that Taylor had passed her Personal Licence course and had applied for her Disbarring Service check. It was still his intention that Taylor would take over the premises.
In response to Members questions Mr Neave said that he had taken on the door staff 4 – 5 months ago as a priority and had now installed CCTV as requested. He said that the door-staff were operational from 8pm – 12 midnight but he usually closed before midnight.
He informed the Committee that if a timescale was set to change the DPS he would do this and had been contacted by a person who had been the DPS at Trinity and had offered to take over Worlds End.
In summing up the West Yorkshire Police Licensing Officer said that they were worried and had concerns as they were of the view that the Licence Holder and the DPS had not delivered or could deliver on the licensing objectives.
RESOLVED – Members carefully considered all the information presented by all the parties. It was their decision to revoke the licence with immediate effect.