Please Contact: Linda Yarham
Please email: Linda.yarham@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Please Direct Dial on: 01263 516019
14 January 2016
A meeting of the Licensing and Appeals Committee of North Norfolk District Council will be held
in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer on Monday 25 January 2016 at
10.00 a.m.
At the discretion of the Chairman, a short break will be taken after the meeting has been running
for approximately one and a half hours.
Members of the public who wish to ask a question or speak on an agenda item are requested to
arrive at least 15 minutes before the start of the meeting. It will not always be possible to
accommodate requests after that time. This is to allow time for the Committee Chair to rearrange
the order of items on the agenda for the convenience of members of the public. Further information
on the procedure for public speaking can be obtained from Democratic Services, Tel: 01263
516010, Email: democraticservices@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Anyone attending this meeting may take photographs, film or audio-record the proceedings and
report on the meeting. Anyone wishing to do so must inform the Chairman. If you are a member
of the public and you wish to speak on an item on the agenda, please be aware that you may be
filmed or photographed.
Sheila Oxtoby
Chief Executive
To: Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds, Mr N Coppack, Mrs H Cox, Mrs P Grove-Jones, Mr B Hannah,
Mr P High, Mr J Lee, Mr P Moore, Mr R Price, Mr R Reynolds, Mr P Rice, Mr S Shaw, Mr R
Shepherd, Mr B Smith, Mrs V Uprichard
All other Members of the Council for information.
Members of the Management Team, appropriate Officers, Press and Public.
If you have any special requirements in order to attend this meeting,
please let us know in advance
If you would like any document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format
or in a different language please contact us
Chief Executive: Sheila Oxtoby
Corporate Directors: Nick Baker & Steve Blatch
Tel 01263 513811 Fax 01263 515042 Minicom 01263 516005
Email districtcouncil@north-norfolk.gov.uk Web site northnorfolk.org
AGENDA
1.
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
2.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
3.
MINUTES
(attached – page 1)
To approve as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Licensing and Appeals
Committee held on 16 November 2015 and also the minutes of meetings of the Licensing
Sub-Committee held on 28 October and 14 December 2015.
4.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
To determine any other items of business which the Chairman decides should be
considered as a matter of urgency pursuant to Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government
Act 1972.
5.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests that they may have in any of the
following items on the agenda. The Code of Conduct for Members requires that
declarations include the nature of the interest and whether it is a disclosable pecuniary
interest.
6.
UPDATE ON GENERAL LICENSING ISSUES
To give an oral update on licensing issues.
7.
UPDATE ON TASK & FINISH GROUPS
To give an oral update on task and finish groups.
8.
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
To pass the following resolution, if necessary:
“That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be
excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they
involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph _ of Part I of
Schedule 12A (as amended) to the Act.”
9.
TO CONSIDER ANY EXEMPT MATTERS ARISING FROM CONSIDERATION OF THE
PUBLIC BUSINESS OF THE AGENDA
Agenda item __3___
LICENSING AND APPEALS COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Licensing and Appeals Committee held at 10.00 am on 16
November 2015 in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer.
Members Present:
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds
Mr N Coppack
Mrs H Cox (Vice-Chairman)
Mrs P Grove-Jones
Mr B Hannah
Mr P High
Mr P Moore
Mr R Price (Chairman)
Mr R Reynolds
Mr R Shepherd
Mr B Smith
Mrs V Uprichard
Mrs J Oliver, Cabinet Member for Licensing
Officers in attendance:
Public Protection Manager, Legal Advisor and Committee Officer
(Regulatory)
16
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Mr J Lee sent apologies.
17
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
None received.
18
MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of the Licensing and Appeals Committee held on 20 July
2015 and also the minutes of meetings of the Licensing Sub-Committee held on 29
July, 18 September and 30 September 2015 were approved as correct records and
signed by the Chairman, subject to the amendment below.
Councillor Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds referred to the final paragraph of Minute 6 of 30
September 2015 and explained that the Sub-Committee had requested that notice of
hearings be sent by recorded delivery post in future to provide evidence of receipt of
the notice if they failed to attend. Councillor R Reynolds stated that the SubCommittee could not be sure that the drivers who had not attended the hearings had
received details of the meeting.
The Legal Advisor stated that the Sub-Committee considered that it was important
where consideration was being given to suspending or revoking a licence to ensure
that drivers could not say they had not been notified.
It was agreed that the final sentence be amended to clarify the intention that notices
would be sent by recorded delivery in future under these circumstances.
Licensing & Appeals Committee
1
25 January 2016
Councillor Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds referred to the final paragraph of the minutes of
30 September and asked if follow up letters had been sent. The Public Protection
Manager confirmed that this had been done.
19
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None.
20
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None.
21
REVIEW OF GAMBLING AND LICENSING POLICIES
The Public Protection Manager presented draft revisions to the Council’s Statement
of Licensing Policy under the Licensing Act 2003, and the Statement of Principles
under the Gambling Act 2005.
The Committee discussed the proposed time limit on speaking contained in the
revised Licensing Policy at paragraph 17.4. The Public Protection Manager
explained that 15 minutes was in line with other authorities in the County. Whilst in
most cases this was sufficient time for parties to make their representations, it was
agreed that the policy should be amended to read “… a maximum of 15 minutes will
be allowed unless varied at the Chairman’s discretion” to allow flexibility where
necessary.
In response to a question by Councillor R Reynolds, the Public Protection Manager
explained that delegation had been amended to include consultations on minor
variations.
The Public Protection Manager explained that concerns had been raised regarding
the impact on the deletion of paragraphs 8.1 to 8.3 relating to licensing hours on the
tourism sector. She explained that the essence of the deleted paragraphs was
included in the amendments. Members agreed this was the case.
Members expressed concern at the lack of consultee responses, and in particular the
Police and safeguarding agencies. The Committee discussed how this issue could
be addressed and made the following suggestions:




raising the issue with the Police & Crime Commissioner (PCC). He was due
to attend a meeting of Overview and Scrutiny Committee and it was
suggested that a question be put to him in advance of the meeting;
raising the issue with the Chief Constable;
asking specific questions of consultees which require an answer;
setting a timescale with a form to complete and explanation that we require a
response;
Councillor B J Hannah stated that he would also raise the matter at the next Police
and Crime Panel meeting and possibly with the PCC.
The Public Protection Manager stated that the local Police responded well on
individual applications, but other consultees did not respond as readily.
Licensing & Appeals Committee
2
25 January 2016
Concerns were raised that the Authority could be held responsible if it had not
received and considered consultee responses and an incident occurred involving a
child.
Councillor P W Moore suggested that the Licensing Team should do all it could to
resolve this matter, and if unsuccessful the matter could be raised at Scrutiny.
The Chairman requested that those Responsible Authorities that had been
consulted be asked if they had received the policy, did they consider the changes
had improved the policy and were there any aspects which had been omitted.
RESOLVED
14
1.
That the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy under the Licensing
Act 2003 be recommended to Full Council for adoption.
2.
That the Statement of Gambling Policy be recommended to Full Council
for adoption.
UPDATE ON GENERAL LICENSING ISSUES
The Public Protection Manager updated the Committee on the following issues:
Cromer Taxi Rank
No comments had been received following consultation and advertisement. However
the North Norfolk Private Hire and Taxi Forum had made comments to Norfolk
County Council (NCC) regarding the direction of travel for vehicles entering and
leaving the rank. The arrangements were not ideal but no concerns had been raised
by the Safety Auditor. The Public Protection Manager had requested that this issue
be reviewed by the County Safety Auditor and that NCC provide measurements for
the rank so agreement could be made on the number of vehicles for which it was
suitable. NCC had indicated that work would be completed in the New Year, or
possibly earlier if necessary.
Councillor Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds referred to the Fakenham taxi rank which was
rarely used. She asked if its use could be enforced.
The Public Protection Manager stated that enforcement could be used if vehicles
were illegally parked, but the use of the rank could not be enforced.
In response to comments by Councillor R Reynolds, the Public Protection Manager
stated that the Licensing Enforcement Officer would visit Fakenham to check where
taxis were parking and follow up the matter if necessary.
Overstrand Road, Cromer
An issue had been raised as to why taxis were not allowed to use the Overstrand
Road junction. There would be cost implications in changing the Order to allow taxis
as well as buses to use this junction.
Councillor Mrs H Cox explained the history of this situation and its connection with a
possible relocation by the doctor’s surgery.
Licensing & Appeals Committee
3
25 January 2016
It was agreed that this matter be held in abeyance pending relocation of the surgery.
Fees and Charges
The Public Protection Manager explained that some licensing fees and charges had
to be based on cost and it was not possible to deal with them in the same way as
other fees and charges. Some fees could be raised by inflation, except those which
were set by statute and at maximum.
The Public Protection Manager stated that an independent consultant was in the
process of being engaged to ensure that the correct amount was being levied for
licensing fees and charges. A report would be brought to the Committee in due
course.
Concerns were expressed with regard to fees being set by Cabinet or under
delegation. The Committee considered that it should consider and set fees and
charges for licensing for endorsement by Cabinet or full Council.
15
UPDATE ON TASK AND FINISH GROUPS
Charitable Collections
The Licensing Enforcement Officer had put together information for the group to
consider and a further meeting would be arranged shortly.
Councillor R Reynolds stated that the Licensing Enforcement Officer had put a great
deal of work into this matter.
Councillor B Smith considered that this matter should be dealt with as soon as
possible.
Councillor Mrs P Grove-Jones requested that the Licensing Enforcement Officer
highlight those issues which Members should be aware of.
Hackney Carriage & Private Hire
Work would be done to make the taxi handbook easier to use and a meeting of the
group would be called to consider this matter.
The meeting closed at 11.09 am.
___________________
Chairman
Licensing & Appeals Committee
4
25 January 2016
LICENSING AND APPEALS SUB-COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Licensing Sub-Committee held on 28 October 2015
in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 10.30 am.
Sub-Committee
Mrs H Cox (Chairman)
Mr J Lee
Mr P Moore
Officers in Attendance:
Public Protection Manager,
Committee Officer (Regulatory).
1
Legal
Advisor
and
APOLOGIES
None received.
2
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None received.
3
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None.
4
Application for a Licence to Drive Hackney Carriage or Private Hire
Vehicles in North Norfolk (WK/150021015)
Present: Applicant
The Chairman introduced the Sub-Committee and Officers.
The Legal Advisor outlined the purpose of the hearing and explained the
procedure for the meeting.
The Public Protection Manager presented the report. The applicant had
applied for a licence to drive hackney carriage or private hire vehicles in North
Norfolk. His DBS report and medical report had raised issues which required
further consideration. She drew attention to the historic nature of the
applicant’s convictions, the current status of his medical conditions and recent
DVLA points for speeding. She circulated two references which had been
received since publication of the report. She outlined the Sub-Committee’s
options for determining this application.
The applicant presented his case. He explained the circumstances of his
historic convictions, which had occurred when he was 18 years old. He
explained the nature of his medical conditions and how they were managed
and monitored. He confirmed that he did not experience drowsiness as a
result of his medication. He had left his previous job because the nature of
the work affected his eye condition.
The Sub-Committee adjourned at 10.08 am and returned at 10.24 am.
RESOLVED
Licensing & Appeals Committee
5
25 January 2016
That the licence be granted subject to the applicant submitting a report
from a medical practitioner or other suitably qualified person in
December of each year, commencing in 2016, to confirm that his eye
condition did not affect his fitness to drive.
5
Application for a Licence to Drive Hackney Carriage or Private Hire
Vehicles in North Norfolk (WK/150013109)
Present: Applicant and Supporter
The Chairman introduced the Sub-Committee and Officers.
The Legal Advisor outlined the purpose of the hearing and explained the
procedure for the meeting.
The Public Protection Manager presented the report. The Applicant had
applied for a licence to drive hackney carriage or private hire vehicles in North
Norfolk. His medical report had raised issues which required further
consideration. She outlined the Sub-Committee’s options for determining this
application.
The Applicant presented his case. He explained that his work involved
children and that, due to the level of care he had required, he had been taken
out of that situation to assess whether or not he was a danger to anyone. He
stated that he had returned to work in June or July without incident and was
no longer receiving mental health care.
The Supporter stated that he and his business partner had met the Applicant
and they were comfortable with having him on the team. He appeared to be a
strong family man who would be an asset to their business.
The Applicant answered the Sub-Committee’s questions.
The Applicant explained in detail the nature of his work. He worked shifts,
which could be anything from 20 to 60 hours a week and sometimes worked
13 days without a day off. His partner was expecting their second child and
he was seeking a more settled working pattern to fit in with family life. He
would not continue to work for his current employers if he received his
licence. He did not provide a taxi service for his current employers.
The Applicant explained that he loved driving and always wanted to drive
taxis, and hopefully he would now have the opportunity to do so.
The Chairman put to the applicant examples of situations which could cause
him frustration, such as clients turning up late or being sick in the vehicle, and
asked how he thought he would cope with such situations.
The applicant explained that he had to deal with similarly frustrating situations
and time pressures in his current job on a daily basis and he was used to it.
He had to keep a happy smile on his face and any anger issues well under
control.
Cllr Moore referred to a statement in his mental health history which he found
very worrying. He referred to the Sub-Committee’s role in protecting the
public rather than the applicant.
Licensing & Appeals Committee
6
25 January 2016
The Applicant explained that the episode referred to happened before his first
child, now five years old, was born, and followed a period of working 60-hour
weeks. His opinions and mood had changed when he discovered his partner
was pregnant. He had no longer had suicidal thoughts and could guarantee
that with another child on the way it would not happen as he would not leave
his family without a father. He drew attention to the risk assessment which
cited his family as strong protection, which he stood by.
In answer to a question regarding references, the Applicant explained that his
current employers were aware that he was looking for another job. He had
requested a reference from his boss but she was very busy and could not do
so, so he had asked others who had known him for a long time instead.
In closing, the Supporter stated that the hours and shift patterns which the
Applicant was working would put anybody under strain and he did not think
the Applicant’s current employment was right for him. He had had a rough
time and needed a break. The medical issues had been signed off.
Individuals needed a break and to be given a second chance; the applicant
was one of those people.
The Sub-Committee adjourned at 10.58 am and returned at 11.46 am.
RESOLVED
That a one-year licence be granted.
The Chairman explained that the Sub-Committee had given careful
consideration to the Applicant’s medical history. They were not medically
qualified and placed significance on the most recent report which had passed
the Applicant as fit to drive hackney carriage and private hire vehicles. Taking
everything into consideration, the Sub-Committee was only prepared to grant
a one-year licence at this stage but the Applicant would be able to re-apply.
The meeting closed at 11.50 am.
__________________________
Chairman
Licensing & Appeals Committee
7
25 January 2016
LICENSING AND APPEALS SUB-COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Licensing Sub-Committee held on 14 December
2015 in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 10.30 am.
Sub-Committee
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds (Chairman)
Mr R Reynolds
Mr B Smith
Officers in Attendance:
Public Protection Manager, Licensing Enforcement
Officer, Legal Advisor and Committee Officer
(Regulatory).
Environmental Protection Manager and Environmental
Protection Officer (for minute 7)
1
APOLOGIES
Mr B Hannah and Mr P Rice.
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds and Mr R Reynolds attended the meeting as
substitutes.
2
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None received.
3
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None.
4
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
RESOLVED
That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press
and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of
business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of
exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 12A
(as amended) to the Act.
5
Review of a Licence to Drive Hackney Carriage or Private Hire Vehicles
in North Norfolk (WK/150029081)
The licence holder was not present. The Public Protection Manager
contacted him by telephone and he informed her that he was unaware of the
hearing. However, the papers had been sent to him at his home address by
Recorded Delivery post and proof of delivery obtained. A letter had also been
sent to the licence holder’s home address by first class post on 16 November
2015. The Sub-Committee accepted that the signature on the proof of
delivery was in the licence holder’s name and was satisfied that he had been
properly informed of the hearing. The Sub-Committee agreed to proceed with
the hearing in his absence.
The Sub-Committee and Officers introduced themselves.
Licensing & Appeals Committee
8
25 January 2016
The Licensing Enforcement Officer presented the report. Correspondence
had been received from Norfolk Constabulary concerning the licence holder’s
driving which had led to question whether he was a fit and proper person to
hold a licence to drive Hackney Carriage or Private Hire Vehicles in North
Norfolk. The Police Officer was unable to be present at the hearing but had
submitted a statement which had been appended to the report. The
Licensing Enforcement Officer outlined the Sub-Committee’s options for
dealing with this case.
The Licensing Enforcement Officer answered questions put to her by the
Legal Advisor and Sub-Committee.
The Licensing Enforcement Officer confirmed that a Traffic Order Report was
a fixed penalty and the licence holder had an obligation to report this to the
Licensing Authority within 7 days. The Licence Holder had been caught by
the same Police Officer on two separate occasions and in two locations.
In response to concerns raised by Mr R Reynolds regarding possible personal
issues between the Police Officer and the Licence Holder given the officer’s
involvement in both incidents, Mr B Smith referred to his own experiences as
a former police officer and assured him that the officer was doing his duty and
there would have been no personal issues involved.
In response to a question by the Legal Advisor, the Licensing Enforcement
Officer confirmed that nothing had been received from the Licence Holder in
writing.
The Chairman considered that the tone of the Police Officer’s letter was
familiar as he had referred to the Licence Holder by his first name.
Mr Smith stated that whilst he did not approve of the practice, it was a
question of forming a relationship and getting co-operation, and was
acceptable in a court of law.
There being no further questions, the Legal Advisor advised the SubCommittee that in making their decision, Members should be as fair as
possible and consider all the information before them and decide whether or
not the Licence Holder was a fit and proper person to continue to hold a
licence to drive taxis in North Norfolk.
The Sub-Committee adjourned at 10.43 am and returned at 11.27 am.
In delivering the Sub-Committee’s decision, the Chairman referred to the
Council’s duty of public protection and the report from the Police Officer which
stated that the Licence Holder had said he was stressed. The SubCommittee considered that the Licence Holder should take action to deal with
this issue.
RESOLVED
That the Sub-Committee considers that the Licence Holder is not a fit
and proper person to hold a licence to drive Hackney Carriage and
Private Hire Vehicles at this time and the licence is therefore suspended
for a period of 28 days.
Licensing & Appeals Committee
9
25 January 2016
6
READMITTANCE OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
The press and public were readmitted for the following matter.
7
Application for a review of a Premises Licence – Captains Table,
Colonial and Scottish Inns Limited, Freeman Street, Wells-next-the-Sea,
Norfolk, NR23 1BQ
Present:
Michael Higginson (Designated Premises Supervisor)
John Higginson (supporting)
Martin Obey, Regional Manager, Enterprise Inns (freeholder) (observing)
PC Richard Spinks, Norfolk Constabulary
Chris Brooks, Norfolk Constabulary Licensing (observing)
Sarah Kirby, PCSO, Wells (observing)
Press representative.
The Chairman referred to a report which had been published in the
Fakenham and Wells Times regarding this case and stated that the SubCommittee would only consider the written and oral representations given to
them.
The Chairman introduced the Sub-Committee and Officers.
The Legal Advisor outlined the purpose of the hearing and explained the
procedure for the meeting.
The Public Protection Manager presented the report. An application had
been made by the Council’s Environmental Protection Team for a review of
the Premises Licence for The Captain’s Table, Wells-next-the-Sea. She
outlined the reasons for the review and drew attention to representations from
responsible authorities and local residents and evidence which had been
gathered to support the review. A chronology detailing calls to the Police was
circulated at the meeting. She reported that there had been no complaints in
respect of noise from amplified music since the service of a Noise Abatement
Notice. However, there were still issues with antisocial behaviour. She
referred to the conditions attached to the existing licence and the effect of
deregulation which meant that some activities were no longer licensable. She
stated that the Sub-Committee had to have regard to the Council’s Licensing
Policy and the Licensing Act. She outlined the Sub-Committee’s options for
determining this matter.
The Public Protection Manager reported that since preparation of the report, a
meeting had been held on 9 December between Michael and John Higginson,
James Wilson, Alick Miles and herself to establish agreement on likely
conditions which may be suitable for the business and to negate the need for
further investigation. Agreement had been reached on conditions to control
live and recorded amplified music, but no agreement had been reached on
dealing with a lack of management control and antisocial behaviour issues.
Under the agreed conditions, there would be no amplified music in the rear
area until soundproofing measures were in place and approved, and only solo
or duo performers and a juke box in the front bar area.
Licensing & Appeals Committee
10
25 January 2016
At the request of Mr J Higginson, Mr Wilson gave clarification regarding the
type of music to be controlled. Mr Higginson stated that the complaints had
been made about live band music. He stated that both he and his brother ran
a number of premises which had caused no trouble.
At the request of the Legal Advisor, a copy of the notes of the meeting held
on 9 December were handed to the Sub-Committee.
Mr Wilson stated that the Environmental Protection Team had responded to
complaints in accordance with their duty and had witnessed statutory
nuisance on a number of occasions. Officers had spoken to the premises
manager to reduce the nuisance but nothing could be done. A Noise
Abatement Notice had been served which was working. The Environmental
Protection Team was satisfied that the conditions agreed at the meeting on 9
December would be sufficient to control noise. However, it was not possible
to come to an agreement with regard to antisocial behaviour, which was
spilling out into other areas. Officers witnessed antisocial behaviour when
large bands were playing and were told that there was somebody outside
managing it, although they did not witness any employee outside, or an
attempt to control the crowd.
PC Spinks stated that the Police had concerns around issues happening
outside the venue as well as inside, relating to screaming, shouting, swearing,
public urination, smashed bottles in the road and general antisocial
behaviour. There were also concerns relating to conversations with the
manager, Mr Drury, regarding the use of a member of staff for door
supervision. A person in that role needed to be licenced in door supervision.
He considered that a door supervision condition would be suitable and that
CCTV should be installed outside to provide evidence of antisocial behaviour
incidents if the Police were unable to attend.
Mr M Higginson stated that all conditions had been adhered to immediately
and the jukebox had been moved into the front room. He stated that the
previous door supervisor had been licenced. With respect to most of the
issues, he could not answer as he had not been present. Mr Drury had not
told him about the incidents and he had come down hard on him and
dismissed him. However, he had been unable to find a suitable manager and
had re-employed Mr Drury on a temporary basis under strict instructions until
a suitable manager could be found. Mr Higginson stated that he had a record
of running sound establishments without problems.
Mr M Higginson referred to the fencing off of a public footpath by the owner of
a premises on The Glebe, following which complaints started. The person
concerned had not mentioned any noise issues to him directly and no
member of the public had complained to him. He stated that if they had done,
he would have crushed the problem immediately and Mr Drury would have
been dismissed. He was stuck as to what to do. Since he had adhered to the
Environmental Health requirements there had been no problems. He stated
that he would come down hard on any staff who did not adhere to his
instructions.
The Chairman invited questions.
In response to questions by Members, Mr M and Mr J Higginson made the
following comments:
Licensing & Appeals Committee
11
25 January 2016














If noise complaints were received when Mr Higginson was on the
premises he would crush the problem immediately. He would not tolerate
it and would not expect others to.
Music events were now only held once a week, on either a Friday or
Saturday.
Drunken persons would be asked to leave.
There had previously been one licenced door supervisor. They were no
longer used as the venue made no money.
The manager was paid to control the premises both inside and out.
Mr J Higginson had no problems when he ran the premises for six
months. There had been issues with youths from elsewhere and when
people would sit on the pub’s benches and cause problems, but they
never came into the premises. Any problems had been dealt with straight
away and there had been no need to call the Police.
The manager had not dealt appropriately with a lady who had made a
complaint regarding noise nuisance. The matter should have been
brought to Mr M Higginson’s attention and he would have spoken to her to
offer reassurance that it would not happen again.
The manager (Mr Drury) had been a “wild card” before he had been
dismissed and did not adhere to the rules.
There was no excuse to open the windows and doors during events. Mr
Higginson had been to the Police with the manager and he had agreed
not to do so. If so he would not be following instructions. The windows
had now been locked so they could not be opened. The fire door could
only be opened by the manager on duty. The rear of the building had
been locked off and people were not allowed into the back room except if
there was a fire.
Everything had been moved to the front of the building as recommended
by Environmental Health.
Troublemakers tended not to come to the premises since the large bands
had been stopped. Solo and duo performers did not interest them.
It was not possible to search everyone for alcohol being brought into the
premises.
Bottles, cans and broken glass in the harbour area did not come from the
premises. Cans were not sold on the premises and people were not
allowed to take alcohol off site. People could not be stopped from walking
across the car park or down the street.
The manager (Mr Drury) was ‘toeing the line’ as he now had a family and
could not afford to lose his job. However Mr Higginson was wary and
would sack him if he did not adhere to his instructions. He told Mr Drury
in front of the police that he would come down hard on him.
In response to a question PC Spinks stated that the last two recorded
assaults had occurred on 2 May and 13 June. He stated that a door
supervisor could take responsibility for the outside area and also search
people if required. He referred to a report relating to 8-9 drunken teenage
girls in the outside area over the previous weekend. A copy of this report had
been circulated to Members prior to the meeting.
Mr M Higginson answered questions by the Legal Advisor.


An additional member of staff would be employed.
Mr Drury had been told to call the police non-emergency help line if
under-age people caused a problem.
Licensing & Appeals Committee
12
25 January 2016



His responsibility was to ‘come down hard’ on the staff. He checked the
close-down was done properly when music events were held.
Staff must increase the number of times they observe outside the
premises. An additional member of staff could be employed on music
nights. There was a problem with people sitting outside the pub. Staff
had to clear bottles and cans even though they were not from the
premises.
Mr Higginson confirmed that he agreed to the proposed conditions
relating to noise control measures and live and recorded amplified music,
and that some of the requirements had already been carried out.
There were no closing statements.
The Legal Advisor advised Members of the Sub-Committee that they would
be considering a review of the premises licence for the Captain’s Table with a
view to the licensing objectives, particularly relating to prevention of crime and
disorder and prevention of public nuisance. In making their decision, they
would consider the Licensing Act, statutory guidance, the Council’s Licensing
Policy and the Human Rights Act. Any decision taken would need to be
appropriate and proportionate to address the promotion of the licensing
objectives. She advised the Sub-Committee of its options for determining this
matter.
The Sub-Committee retired at 12.52 pm and returned at 3.20 pm.
The Chairman outlined the decision.
RESOLVED
That the following conditions be imposed on the premises licence,
which modify the current conditions:
1.
There is to be no live or recorded amplified music within the rear
room until sound proofing work has been completed to prevent
noise breakout. This work has to have been approved as
sufficient by an Officer of North Norfolk District Council
Environmental Health Department. Such approval must be in
writing.
2.
There be the reinstatement of the conditions relating to the
playing of live and recorded amplified music which were
previously in place before the deregulation of this entertainment.
These are numbered:
LIPN10
All external doors/windows must be kept closed other than for
access and egress, in all rooms when events involving amplified
music or speech are taking place.
LIPN19
The Designated Premises Supervisor or a nominated
representative shall receive and respond to complaints
throughout the duration of all noisy events and will have full
control at all times over the sound amplification.
Licensing & Appeals Committee
13
25 January 2016
3.
No amplified music to be played other than the following:
 Solo or duo musical artists are permitted to perform with
an independent vocal PA system in the red hatched area
marked on appendix A to the schedule
 Via the juke box system in the front bar only
4.
Permitted amplified music, as set out in paragraph 3 above, must
not be audible outside the premises.
5.
Permitted amplified music, as set out in paragraph 3 above, must
finish by 23:00.
6.
All live and recorded amplified music between the hours of 23:00
and 08:00 is prohibited.
7.
Self-closing devices to be attached and maintained to the doors
highlighted in blue hatching to Appendix A to the schedule.
8.
There be a continuous presence of SIA approved security staff
between 1900 hours and midnight on Fridays and Saturdays and
at all times during events involving the playing of live and
amplified music.
The meeting closed at 3.32 pm.
__________________________
Chairman
Licensing & Appeals Committee
14
25 January 2016