Agenda item

The licensing officer presented their report.  Members had no questions for the licensing officer.

 

The trading standards officer, the applicant for the review, addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the trading standards officer.  The legal representative for the licensee also had questions.

 

The officer from the Metropolitan Police Service, supporting the review, addressed the sub-committee. Members had questions for the police officer.

 

The licensing responsible authority officer addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the licensing responsible authority officer.  The legal representative for the licensee also had questions.

 

The licensee and their legal representative addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the licensee and their legal representative.

 

All parties were given up to five minutes for summing up.

 

The meeting adjourned at 3.05pm for the sub-committee to consider its decision.

 

The meeting reconvened at 3.56pm and the chair advised all parties of the decision.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the council’s licensing sub-committee, having considered an application made under Section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003 submitted by trading standards for the review of the premises licence issued in respect of Peckham Food & Wine, 176 Peckham High Street, London SE15 5EG, and having had regard to all relevant representations, has decided to suspend and modify the premises licence.

 

Conditions

 

1.  That the premises licence shall be suspended for eight weeks.

 

2.  That a personal licence holder shall be on the premises at all times when alcohol is sold.

 

3.  That Muhammad Baloch and Naseem Baluch shall be banned from the premises.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reasons

 

This was an application made by trading standards for the review of the premises licence in respect of Peckham Food & Wine, 176 Peckham High Street, London SE15 5EG.  The review application was submitted in respect of the prevention of crime and disorder, and the protection of children from harm, licensing objectives.

 

The application was made following an application for the transfer of the premises licence of the Peckham Food & Wine premises, made by Peckham Food Point Ltd which was granted by the licensing sub-committee.

 

Reference to the transfer application is pertinent as the facts of the review application was the reason for the police objection to the transfer.  The application was made prior to a review of the premises licence of the Peckham Food & Wine premises, made by Peckham Food Point Ltd.  Reference to the decision for the transfer application should therefore be read alongside this decision for the review application and vice versa.

 

In summary the trading standards application was on the basis that on 6 March 2025 officers from trading standards team and the Night-Time Economy (NTE) police team, inspected the premises following a complaint that on 03 March 2025 concerning an underage sale being made.  The inspection identified a number of breaches of the licence:

 

i.  Condition 289 (retention of CCTV made immediately available to authority officers)

 

ii.  Condition 4AB (staff training records regarding underage sales not made available to by an employee at the premises).

 

iii.  Condition 348 (operational EPOS or POS).

 

iv.  Condition 840 (surrender of premises licence number 880978).

 

During the visit neither the owner, Muhammed Baloch nor the designated premises supervisor, Naseen Baluch were present. A member of staff was behind the till and was later joined by Mr Asif Ali, the manager of the shop.

 

Officers also found a total of 400 cigarettes at the premises, that were seized under the Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016 due to the packets appeared to be for the Nigerian market and displayed foreign health warnings and the supply of these being contrary to the UK regulations. Mr Ali claimed these cigarettes were his, however they were found at the premises in a black bag under the counter. Under the Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016, a person supplies a tobacco product if, in the course of a business, the person possesses it for supply.

 

 

On 8 March 2025 at 00:14am, the premises was witnessed allowing customers into the premises to purchase goods in breach of condition 340 (between 00:00 to 06:00 hours all alcohol and convenience sales to be made via a window hatch/no admittance to the premises by members of the public during these times).

 

On 15 March 2025, officers attended the premises and at 00:45 witnessed a number of people inside purchasing items, in breach of condition 340. A subsequent compliance check of the previous breached conditions was carried out and found further breaches:

 

i.  Condition 100 (no supply of alcohol when there is no DPS).

 

ii.  Condition 101 (all alcohol sold by, a person who holds a personal licence or authorised by one).

 

iii.  Condition 289 (EPOS) all CCTV footage kept for thirty-one (31) days and made immediately available on request).

 

iv.  Condition 336 (a minimum of one (1) personal licence holder between the hours of 00:00 and 06:00).

 

v.  Condition 340 (sales between 00:00 and 06:00 to be made via a window hatch).

 

vi.  Condition 341 (CCTV must be available to view or download to a removable storage device, at the immediate request).

 

A warning letter addressed to Muhammed Baloch and hand delivered to the premises on 21 March 2025.

 

On 15 April 2025 trading standards carried out an underage sales test purchasing at the premises and a disposable nicotine inhaling product was sold to a 17 year old volunteer by a member of staff at the premises contrary to the nicotine Inhaling products (Age of Sale and Proxy Purchasing) Regulations 2015. The seller did not ask for proof of age nor did the member of staff make any checks on the purchaser’s age. An age restricted products checklist was completed and found:

 

i.  No A3 sized tobacco warning statement notice on display (Regulation 4 Children and Young Persons (Protection from Tobacco) Act 1991).

 

ii.  One of the two sliding doors on the tobacco display cabinet was open so that tobacco products could be seen by members of the public (Section 7A(1) Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Act 2002).

 

iii.  Behind the counter there was and open packet of cigarettes with five sticks inside it, indicative of the sale of single unpackaged cigarettes (Regulation 3 Children and Young Persons (Protection from Tobacco) Act 1991).

 

iv.  58 vapes containing nicotine found on display and behind the counter were seized for non-compliance (Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016), with non-English language labelling and exceeded the 2ml tank size, which a single use vaping device is allowed.

 

The licensing sub-committee heard from the police who supported the review application. For the purposes of this notice of decision only, the police evidence was primarily addressed in the notice of decision for the transfer application.

 

Having transferred the licence to Peckham Food Point Ltd, the licensing sub-committee heard from the representative for the current licence holder who stated that the breaches had occurred when the premises was under the previous ownership of Muhammed Baloch.  The review application was limited in time (between 1 March 2025 and 21 May 2025), there had been no persistent underage sales, nor other failed test purchases, nor any pending prosecution(s).

 

Neither Peckham Food Point Ltd nor Mr Ali were responsible for the breaches that had occurred.  Mr Ali was not the controlling mind of the operation as suggested by the police. Mr Ali’s responsibility was limited to the possession of the Nigerian cigarettes that were on the premises on 6 March 2025. 

 

The sub-committee could deal with the review application by way of a suspension and additional conditions being added to the premises licence. It was asserted that moving forward Peckham Food Point Ltd and Mr Ali had all the necessary training and qualifications that would ensure that the premises would be run in compliance with the premises licence in the future.

 

The options available to this sub-committee were:

 

i.  Take no action. The licensing sub-committee found a significant number of breaches have taken place and taking no action was not an option.

 

ii.  Revoke the licence. The licensing sub-committee too the view that the revocation of the licence would on this occasion be too draconian and disproportionate to the matters alleged.

 

iii.  Exclude a licensable activity. It was possible to excluded from the licence the sale of the sale of alcohol and prohibit the sale of all tobacco and all nicotine Inhaling products. However, it was considered the permanent exclusion of these products was determined to be disproportionate.

 

iv.  Remove the designated premises supervisor. Having just determined the transfer, this step was considered unnecessary.

 

v.  Suspend the licence.  Because the transfer applications had just been determined, and the newly appointed designated premises supervisor had been an employee when the breaches had been carried out, it was felt that the suspension of the licence was an appropriate course of action.  The suspension of the licence would also allow the designated premises supervisor time to overhaul the management and procedures of the business, and for staff to complete additional training and allow them to complete their personal licence training and obtain their personal licence certificates. The period of suspension was therefore felt justified in the circumstances. 

 

vi.  Modify the premises licence. The additional conditions set out in this notice of decision reinforced the matters that concerned the sub-committee and would ensure compliance of the premises in the future.

 

In reaching its decision, the licensing sub-committee had regard to all the relevant considerations, its equality duties and four licensing objectives and considered that this decision was appropriate and proportionate.

 

Appeal rights

 

This decision is open to appeal by either:

 

a)  The applicant for the review

b)  The premises licence holder

c)  Any other person who made relevant representations in relation to the application.

 

Such appeal must be commenced by notice of appeal given by the appellant to the justices’ clerk for the Magistrates’ Court for the area within the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the appellant was notified by this licensing authority of the decision.

 

This decision does not have effect until either:

 

a)  The end of the period for appealing against this decision; or

b)  In the event of any notice of appeal being given, until the appeal is disposed of.