Decision details
Application for a Review of Premises Licence -Y ours London, Basement and Ground Floor, 54-56 Scrutton Street , EC2A 4PH
Decision Maker: Licensing Sub Committee A
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
Decision:
RESOLVED: The Licensing Sub-Committee, in considering this decision from the information presented to them within the report and at the hearing today and having regard to the promotion of the licensing objectives:
• The prevention of crime and disorder
• Public safety
• Prevention of public nuisance
• The protection of children from harm
The Licensing Sub-Committee made the following determination: to modify the
premises licence as follows:
• Sunday to Wednesday the rear garden shall close at 22:00.
• Thursday to Saturday the rear garden shall close at 00:00.
• Condition 18 to be amended as follows:
“There shall be no glass, drinks or open containers taken outside of the
premises at any time”.
• The capacity of the premises shall be determined on the grounds of fire
safety and following a physical assessment by a competent person.
• The Premises Licence holder to submit a Noise Management Plan to
be submitted to the Licensing Authority and the Environmental Protection Team to resolve noise issues with the extractor fan, speakers
The Reasons for the Decision:
The Licensing Sub-Committee after carefully considering the evidence presented to them at the review hearing by the Applicant, (the Environmental Protection Team), the Licensing Authority, the Legal Representative who represented the Premises Licence holder, the Premises Licence holder, and Other Person (a local resident) who made representations in support of the premises decided that the appropriate course of action was to modify the conditions on the premises licence in particular relating to the rear garden, concerns about the extractor fan and the need to test the noise level and rear garden.
The Sub-committee took into consideration that the Environmental Protection Team has applied for a review seeking to revoke the premises licence for the Basement And Ground Floor 54-56 Scrutton Street.
The Sub-committee heard representations from the Environmental Protection Officer that the review on the grounds of prevention of public nuisance was for the period 19 September 2021 - 22 March 2023.
The Sub-committee took into consideration that there were 36 official complaints received from local residents over an 18month period on an ongoing basis without resolution, and for that reason the Environmental Protection Team were seeking to revoke the premises licence.
The Sub-committee took into consideration that the Premises Licence holder has had a premises licence since 12th June 2018. Subsequently the Premises Licence holder applied to vary the premises licence in October 2021 to extend the terminal hours for all licensable activities on Thursday to Saturday. The Licensing Sub-Committee heard this variation application on 11th January 2022.
The Sub-committee took into account local residents’ representations in support of the review application.
The Sub-committee took into consideration the following complaints received by the Environmental Protection Team:
• 25.03.23 at 23:11 hours - Loud amplified music
• 26.3.23 from 00:08 to 00:15 hours - Loud amplified music,
• 21.07.22 The Environmental Protection Team visited following complaints about music from the garden at 23:08 then at 23:36 hours when the premises were closed.
The Sub-committee took into consideration the following visits carried out by the Environmental Protection Team:
I. Visit in March 2023, a customer brought their own sound system in and played it,and since then it has never happened again.
II. On 11 May 2023, was a proactive visit found in a residential premises and heard what was a statutory nuisance.
III. Noise nuisance witnessed on 11th May 2023 at 20:55 Noise Abatement notices have been issued against the premises.
IV. A local resident for over eight months stated there have been no disturbances in the area and it is quite noisy and a busy area.
V. A local resident’s bedroom is above the garden and has no issues from the premises and no complaints about noise.
The Premises Licence holder’s legal representative contended that they were to visits from Environmental Protection regarding anonymous complaints, which they have not seen and have not been fully investigated
The Sub-committee noted that the last complaint was in April 2023, and premises have a condition that restricts them to only playing background music.
The Sub-committee took into account that Environmental Protection Officer
did go to the front of the restaurant and heard the extractor fan noise.
The Sub-committee took into consideration that there was extractor fan noise from 18 May 2023. It was noted that since then a further nine complaints were received at the end of June 2023, relating to extractor fan noise. The Premises licence holder was notified about these complaints.
The Sub-committee noted that on 11 May 2023 noise nuisance was witnessed prior to that there were no complaints about the extractor fan since 2018.
The Sub-committee took into consideration that the local resident confirmed the
extractor fan could be heard, however, the local resident did not feel it affected them.
The legal advisor for the Premises licence holder contended that there were no
issues prior to May 2023. There was a possible issue with the hardware which can cause disturbance to residents above the premises.
The Sub-committee noted that the Environmental Protection Officer made
representations that complaints were made during the Covid 19 pandemic
restrictions from residential premises.
The Sub-committee took into account that the Environmental Protection Officer
heard the extractor system making a humming noise which was intrusive, and the Premises licence holder did not contact the Environmental Protection Team. The Environmental Protection Officer made submissions that they did not know how all residents were affected; they only knew how the complainant was affected, and the Environmental Protection Officer witnessed a statutory nuisance.
The Environmental Protection Officer made representations that they try to work with licence holders, however, the Premises licence holder did not communicate in this case. Therefore, Environmental Protection had no choice but to take enforcement action. The Premises licence holder contended that they were not aware of the Environmental Protection Team communications.
The Sub-committee took into consideration that most of the complaints are to do with the use of the outdoor area Sunday to Wednesday up to 23:00 hours other days after midnight.
The Sub-committee noted that the noise report was produced for planning purposes, and that there were 2 visits to the premises in March and May 2023.
The Environment Protection Team found the music played is background music
condition 23 was being complied with as they use a noise limiter that was working.
The Sub-committee took into account that on 11 May 2023 customers were found smoking in the garden area which can be a maximum of 50% enclosed under smoke free legislation. It was noted that if the roof is open it cannot contain the noise.
The Premises licence holder made representations that there are a lot of similar
premises to theirs and they have not generated noise nuisance from the gardens. The Environmental Protection Officer made representations that if speakers are on the ceiling, it will vibrate. The Licence holder made representations that the speakers run under the residential flats above the premises and they have not had complaints from those residents.
The Sub-committed noted the Environmental Protection Team representation that they receive complaints, some of which are unsubstantiated, and that the review application was made due to the lack of communication with the Premises licence holder. The Sub-committee noted that the decision to bring a review was not taken lightly.
The Environment Protection Officer made representations that they were willing to meet with the licence holders and they wanted the premises licence holder to maintain the licensing objectives.
The Sub-committee noted that the local resident who lives above the premises made representations that it is generally a noisy area, but it is not the premises that have caused this, it is the customers. It was noted that customers are asked to leave quietly and without causing a nuisance.
The Premises licence holder’s legal representative made representations that the complaints were not investigated sufficiently, and the Premises licence holder does not accept that they did not respond to the Environmental Protection Team correspondence. The Premises licence holder made representations that they were happy to meet with the Environmental Protection Team.
The Sub-committee noted the Environmental Protection Office’s representation
that the Noise Abatement Notice has expired and if the extractor fan is not replaced they will consider enforcement action such as prosecution. The Environmental Protection Officer felt that the Premises licence holder needed to take the complaints more seriously and communicate with the Environmental Protection Team.
The Sub-committee were disappointed that the Premises Licence holder did not engage with the Environmental Protection Team earlier to try and resolve the issues.
The Sub-committee decided not to revoke the premises licence, and took into
consideration that there were a number of complaints. The Sub-committee noted there were two residents who supported the application for the review. These local residents did not attend and make their representations, therefore the Sub-committee could not and ask questions.
The Sub-committee felt it was not appropriate to revoke the premises licence.
The Sub-committee took into consideration that the Premises licence holder accepted the conditions proposed by the Licensing Authority as the way forward to resolve the public nuisance issues.
The Sub-committee felt that with modified conditions on the licence, the premises would improve and be run in a manner that complied with the conditions of the premises licence, and would promote the licensing objectives in the future.
Public Informative:
The Premises licence holder is encouraged to engage in meaningful dialogue with the local residents to resolve any issues relating to the premises, and for the Premises licence holder to play their part in reducing any impacts of noise emanating from the premises, particularly during the evening and late at night.
Your right to appeal
If you are aggrieved by any term, condition or restriction attached to this decision, you have the right to appeal to the Thames Magistrates Court, 58 Bow Road, London E3 4DJ within 21 days of the date you receive this written decision
Publication date: 16/04/2024
Date of decision: 03/07/2023
Decided at meeting: 03/07/2023 - Licensing Sub Committee A
Accompanying Documents:
PDF 4 MB