Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

None.

It was confirmed that all items of business were marked Part I and would be considered in public.

None.

INTRODUCTION

Lois King, Licensing Officer, introduced the contested application for the variation of a Premises Licence in respect of Trimex Food and Wine, 296 High Street, Harlington, UB3 5DU.

Members were informed that the application sought to increase the times at which the sale of alcohol was permissible by three hours daily with the proposed hours for the sale of alcohol being 0600 hours to 0200 hours Monday to Sunday. The current licence permitted the sale of alcohol from 0600 hours to 2300 hours Monday to Sunday. The Licensing Officer highlighted the reasons for which the Licence Holder had applied for the extended hours in that, given the premises’ proximity to Heathrow Airport and associated hotels, the extended hours would be beneficial to them.

The Sub-Committee were informed that one representation had been received regarding a potential increase in public nuisance from Councillor Peter Money, Ward Councillor for Heathrow Villages, on behalf of the Harlington Residents’ Association. It was highlighted that no representations had been received from the Metropolitan Police, the Council’s Anti-Social Behaviour and Environment Team or any Responsible Authorities. It was understood that the Licence Holder had spoken with Councillor Money about the proposed hours, however the Residents’ Association wished to maintain their representation.

The Licensing Officer recommended that the Sub-Committee grant the variation with appropriate conditions to uphold the licensing objectives as detailed in their report.

THE APPLICANT

The Licence Holder’s Legal Representative, Mr Leo Charlambides of Counsel, addressed the Sub-Committee and highlighted the fact that although all relevant responsible authorities were consulted with, none had submitted representations or raised any concerns with the application to vary the premises licence. This was important as they were deemed to be experts in their respective fields. Regarding visits to the premises undertaken by the licensing authority, it was noted that visits in September 2019 and August 2021 had found no issues or reasons for concern.

With regard to the representation received from the Ward Councillor, on behalf of the Residents’ Association, the difference between hard evidence and unsubstantiated concerns was noted, with the representation deemed to be more of an unsubstantiated concern based on unfounded fears. The Ward Councillor’s representation noted additional concerns regarding a potential nuisance to the occupiers in the apartments above the shop; it was highlighted that the apartments were owned by the licence holder and no complaints had been received from the occupiers with regard to the business activities of the premises below.

Members’ attention was drawn to the operating schedule outlined on pages 22 and 23 of the agenda, this was highlighted as a demonstration of the Licence Holder operating a responsible business premises. The lack of representations from responsible authorities indicated that the current operating schedule was seen as up to standard.

Members questioned how the Licence Holder would ensure that customers would not hang around outside the shop drinking. The Sub-Committee were informed that the premises had a rota of four core staff members, two of which would be on the premises  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.