Agenda item

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submits a report for an application for a new premises licence for Dosti Pan Centre & Off Licence, 2c Uppingham Road, Leicester.

Councillor Pickering, as Chair led on introductions and outlined the procedure the hearing would follow.

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submitted a report on an application for a new premises licence for Dosti Pan Centre & Off Licence, 2c Uppingham Road, Leicester.

The applicant Mr Ajay Valgi and his representative Mr Anil Bhawsar, agent from Licensing Hub, were in attendance. Also in attendance was the representative of the objectors Mr Irfan Safdar Waraich. Also present was the Head of Regulatory Services and the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee.

The Head of Regulatory Services presented the report and outlined details of the application.

Seventy-five identical representations were received from members of the public objecting to the application between 7 March and 3 April 2025. The representations related to all four licensing objectives. The members of the public were concerned that granting the licence would provide a further source of alcohol within an area already so heavily populated with licensed premises that crime, disorder and public nuisance were higher than the national average. Residents in the area were already suffering from noise nuisance and antisocial behaviour at all hours of the day and night, and they were scared to go out in the evenings due to the rising levels of anti-social behaviour, loitering and sexual violence crimes. These representees also said that the nearby children's park was constantly full of drunk people and was littered with broken glass and other dangerous paraphernalia. These individuals simply bought packs and packs of cheap alcohol from the large number of local off-licenses, headed to the park opposite, and then consumed en masse dumping their cans and other rubbish around the streets and within the park. Crimes in the area in the past year included drugs, possession of weapons, anti-social behaviour offences, burglary and theft of vehicles and property, criminal damage and sexual violence with high rates of failure to prosecute by the police. The issues described above led to genuine concerns around personal safety. The area was densely populated with many young families. Seeing gangs of men drinking all hours caused distress and fear. Women and children in particular felt anxiety and concern over their personal welfare.

Four petitions were received objecting to the application, signed by a total of 152 people. The representations related to all four licensing objectives.

100 identical representations were received from members of the public supporting the application. The representations stated that there was a good enough reason to open a store like this because the residents needed more choice in the area. Opening this store would not have a negative effect on anything in any way. Workers needed a store open for longer hours, due to their different work times.

One petition was received in support of the application, signed by 30 people.

Mr Waraich was given the opportunity to outline the details of the objectors’ representation and answered questions from Members and officers.

Mr Bhawsar and Mr Valgi were given the opportunity to address the Sub-Committee and answered questions from the Members.

All parties present were then given the opportunity to sum up their positions and make any final comments.

The Sub-Committee received legal advice from the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee in the presence of all those present and were advised of the options available to them in making their decision. The Sub-Committee were also advised of the relevant policy and statutory guidance that needed to be taken into account when making their decision.

In reaching their decision, Members felt they should deliberate in private on the basis that this was in the public interest, and as such outweighed the public interest of their deliberation taking place with the parties represented present, in accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005.

The Chair announced that the decision and reasons would be announced in writing within five working days. The Chair informed the meeting that the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee would be called back to give advice on the wording of the decision.

The Sub-Committee recalled the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee to give advice on the wording of the decision.

RESOLVED:

The Sub-Committee’s decision is that it is appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives to GRANT the application subject to the conditions consistent with the Operating Schedule detailed in Appendix C of the Licensing Officer’s Report.

REASONS

In considering the application by Ajay Valgi for a Premises Licence authorising the sale of alcohol seven days a week from 06:00 to 00:00 for consumption off the premises at Dosti Pan Centre and Off Licence, 2C Uppingham Road, Leicester, the Sub-Committee has considered the Licensing Officer’s Report and all the relevant representations, both written and oral. The Sub-Committee has taken account of all relevant legislation, the Statutory Guidance, the Regulators’ Code, and the Council’s Licensing Policy. The Sub-Committee has had regard in its deliberations to the steps appropriate to promote the licensing objectives in the overall interest of the local community and has decided the matter on its merits on the evidence presented to it. The Sub-Committee has had regard to the public sector equality duty detailed in section 149 the Equality Act 2010 and has taken a risk-based approach to its decision which has been made on the balance of probability. The Sub-Committee has, as it is required to do, limited its deliberation to the promotion of the licensing objectives (with each licensing objective being of equal importance) and nothing outside of those parameters.

Dosti Pan Centre and Off Licence is a small shop on Uppingham Road. It has a small retail customer area and a kitchen and toilet to the rear. The area is residential but there are a number of shops including off-licences in the area. The premises are to open seven days per week from 06:00 to midnight. The application is for authorisation to supply alcohol during the mentioned hours for consumption off the premises. The applicant Ajay Valgi is also the proposed Designated Premises Supervisor.

Opposing the application, four petitions were signed by 152 people and seventy five written representations were received. The reasons for the objections were similar, if not identical, for objecting to the application. These were based on all four of the licensing objectives.

The Sub-Committee was addressed at the hearing by a resident who explained and expanded on the representation. The resident lived in the local area for years and confirmed the other objectors were local residents. The area already contains a high number of licensed premises as there are four identical premises selling similar products. Crime, disorder and public nuisance is higher than the national average. The resident indicated residents are suffering from noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour at all hours of the day and night. This has caused residents to feel concern and scared when leaving their homes. They mention further concerns at the rising levels of anti-social behaviour, loitering and sexual violence crimes. There were concerns that alcohol was being purchased cheaply and consumed on a nearby children’s park. As a result, the park is constantly filled with people who are under the influence and the park is littered with broken glass and other dangerous paraphernalia. Litter is also discarded on the street. The resident mentioned the area is densely populated with many young families. Seeing gangs of men drinking all hours causes distress and fear. Women and children in particular feel anxiety and concern over their personal welfare. The resident mentioned complaints had been made to the local authority and he had photos in support of his concerns. These were not produced for the Sub-Committee’s attention at the meeting. The resident indicated the area was one where a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) was in force.

The Sub-Committee were made aware of two communications received by those originally opposing the application, who were withdrawing their representation. Of the two, one stated they had been coerced into providing a representation against and confirmed they were now in favour of Mr Valgi’s application.

In support of the application, two petitions containing 40 signatures, and 108 representations were received. The representations mentioned residents needed more choice in the area and having an additional off-licence in the area would not have a negative impact. They mentioned shift workers needed a store open for longer hours due to different shift patterns and working times.

Mr Valgi’s Licensing Agent, Mr Bhawsar, addressed the Sub-committee in detail. He provided details of Mr Valgi’s experience. Mr Valgi had approximately 6 years’ experience in the trade as he had been employed in similar businesses and it was confirmed Mr Valgi was a personal licence holder. He would operate the store as a family business The store would sell other items and not specifically alcohol. Mr Bhawsar described Mr Valgi as a responsible retailer who would implement all the conditions (as set out in Appendix C of the Licensing Officer’s report). Mr Valgi was aware non-compliance with the conditions would result in a breach and he was aware of the consequences. Mr Bhawsar mentioned none of the Responsible Authorities had made representations. Mr Bhawsar mentioned the business would serve the community, especially shift workers and offer choice. Photos taken in support of the application showed the area on two separate evenings were distributed to the Sub-Committee to indicate the local area was not having the issues as those objecting had described. Mr Bhawsar confirmed there would be two external cameras positioned at the entrance to the store. Mr Bhawsar referred the Sub-Committee to research he had undertaken for local crime statistics in the area available on the internet, which did not disclose evidence of anti-social behaviour. Mr Bhawsar suggested the complaints received were exaggerated and further suggested a possible fabrication by mentioning there were repeated signatures by those putting forward a representation against the application.

The Licensing Officer confirmed a current Public Space Protection Order was no longer in effect as the attending resident objecting to the application had believed.

The Sub-Committee noted evidence of the issues described in the area was not submitted for the Sub-Committee to consider at the hearing. (Note: The resident submitted evidence supporting his objections after a decision had been made by the Sub-Committee).

The Sub-Committee appreciated the concern of neighbouring residents.

The Sub-Committee was concerned at the possibility of coercion placed on those making a representation against the application.

The Sub-Committee noted that no representations had been received from any of the Responsible Authorities. In particular, the Police did not refer to any crime and disorder concerns in the area and the Noise Team did not raise any concerns regarding noise nuisance in this residential area.

The Sub-Committee noted the existence of other licensed premises in the area. The commercial viability or local need for another licensed premises in the area was not a matter for the Sub-Committee. The sole matter for the Sub-Committee was whether it was appropriate to authorise the supply of alcohol seven days a week from 06:00 to 00:00 for consumption off the premises.

The Sub-Committee believes the conditions subject to which the Licence is granted deal with the representations which have been made. The conditions are appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives and they are proportionate.

Any appeal against the decision must be made within 21 days to the Magistrates Court.