Agenda item

To consider an application for a premises licence review brought by the Enforcement Response team as a Responsible Authority. 

 

RECEIVED the application for the review of N17 Lounge (the Pride of Tottenham) Premises License – 614 High Road, London N17 as detailed on pages 35 to 113 of the agenda pack.

 

a.         Licensing Officer’s Introduction

 

The Licensing Team Leader, Daliah Barrett, introduced the application for a review of the N17 Lounge (the Pride of Tottenham) Premises License, referring to the documents contained in the agenda pack.

 

NOTED that the application for review had been made on the grounds that the premises had failed to uphold the licensing objectives of promoting public safety, preventing crime and disorder and the prevention of public nuisance. NOTED that the review had been brought against the above named premises in relation to a series of noise complaints from the premises over a period of time and flyers being used to advertise events beyond the permitted opening hours of the premises.

 

The premises had operated as a public house and night club since July 2010. The licence was granted with conditions and reduced hours than those the applicant had applied for due to concerns raised by Enforcement Response relating to noise nuisance being a likely problem for nearby residents should later hours have been granted. The reduced hours granted to the premises attracted a small number of complaints during this time. Mr Mufwankolo then applied to vary the licence in 2012; this application went through without being contested. The Committee was advised that the increase in hours lead to a series of complaints relating to noise nuisance.

 

The applicant stepped down as DPS 27 January 2015 and the role was taken over by Ms Basirika. Mr Mufwankolo remained as the Premises Licence Holder and carried overall responsibility for the operation of the premises. There was a subsequent transfer and DPS variation on 17^th March 2015 to Lisa Nankunda. The Licensing Authority was not aware of Mr Mufwankolo not being in charge at the premises and contacted him following a series of complaints received in relation to the venue. The applicant subsequently took back the premises from Ms Nankundu   and this matter was subject to a court case. The premises ceased operation for a period of weeks while the applicant attended court. The Licensing Authority was only made aware of this by residents who were happy to see a sign on the premises saying that it was now closed. Mr Mufwankolo took back the licence in his name on 1th August 2015 and named himself in the role of DPS on 5^th October 2015. A further transfer of the licence was made to a Mr Illyunga on 12 November 2015. Mr Mufwankolo then re-established himself as the Premises Licence Holder on 30^th March 2016.

 

The Licensing Team Leader advised that the premises operating to its current times offering both live and recorded music had caused public nuisance over the years. The Committee considered that whilst Mr Mufwankolo had ‘stepped aside’ at various periods since 2015 the operation and management of the premises had been the cause for complaints from residents who had been disturbed by noise emanating from the premises. This had been further exacerbated by the lateness of the hours for the premises in this locality.

 

The Committee NOTED the times of licensable activities allowed under the licence:

 

Live Music and Recorded Music

Monday to Wednesday       1100 to 0000 hrs

Thursday                    11:00 to 0130    

Friday to Sunday                  1100 to 0330 hrs

Provision of Late Night Refreshment

Monday to Wednesday       1100 to 0030 hrs

Thursday                    1100 to 0200    

Friday to Sunday              1100 to 0400 hrs

Supply of Alcohol

Monday to Wednesday       1100 to 0030 hrs

Thursday                    1100 to 0200    

Friday to Sunday                  1100 to 0330 hrs

The opening hours of the premises:

Monday to Wednesday       0700 to 0030 hrs

Thursday                    0700 to 0200    

Friday to Sunday              1100 to 0400 hrs

 

 

b.         Police Representation

 

NOTED the representation by Daliah Barrett on behalf of Mark Greaves, the Police representative, including that:

 

On Thursday 18^th August 2016 at 1230 Police attended N17 Lounge, Pride of Tottenham, by appointment to meet the Licensee and DPS Mr Mpala Mufwankolo. During the visit, Mr Greaves showed him 4 flyers relating to events at his venue advertised as going on until 0500, which was after the permitted opening hours. The applicant stated that the flyers were wrong and the events ended at 0400.  CCTV was checked but it only held footage between the 10^th and 18^th August so none of events on the flyers were available to view. A condition on his licence under the prevention of crime & disorder stated that CCTV must be kept for 30 days, so all the days on these flyers should have been available to see what time the venue closed. In response to this Mr Mufwankolo advised that Police took his 2 x 1 Terabyte hard drives after the Tottenham riots and had not returned them.

The Committee was advised that Mr Mufwankolo had purchased a new CCTV system with a 2 terabyte hard drive but it has only been programmed to store 9 days of footage, which Mr Mufwankolo stated he was not aware of. Mr Greaves commented that Mr Mufwankolo must have realized the new CCTV system was not programmed to retain recordings for 30 days. A 2 terabyte hard drive was enough for at least 30 days. Mr Mufwankolo assured the Police that the CCTV system would be reprogrammed for 30 days.

Police reviewed CCTV from 13^th and 14^th August and the venue closed on time. During the visit, Mr Greaves also raised the issue of noise concerns relating to his clientele and their leaving venue at end of events and loitering outside making noise. In response, Mr Mufwankolo stated that they were Africans whose culture was to loiter outside such venues all night talking loudly and when he tried to move them along they become abusive and threatening. Mr Mufwankolo acknowledged that he was unable to prevent the patrons from creating noise nuisance when they left the venue.

The Licensing Team Leader talked through some CCTV footage taken from outside the premises which showed; a fight breaking out, the venue open after its permitted hours and alcohol being served after 4am.

 

In response to a question from Mr Charge, officers advised that noise officers usually worked until 4am. Mr Charge suggested that this resulted in the Council being unable to witness the noise after 4am. Mr Charge informed the Committee that the main issue was around the level of noise created in the early hours of the morning and the detrimental impact on local residents being able to sleep. The noise was caused by excessively loud music and also from people leaving the venue and creating further nuisance such as cars beeping their horns.  In response to a question from the Committee, Mr Charge advised that this was typical of most weekends. Mr Charge advised that he lived at Millicent Fawcett Court.

 

c.         Representations from Enforcement Response

 

NOTED the representation by Derek Pearce, Enforcement Response Team Leader on behalf of the Charles Buckle, Enforcement Response Officer, including that: 

 

Mr Buckle visited the premises at 00.36am on 25^th July as a result of a noise compliant and witnessed loud music emanating from the premises and echoing up road from 50 yards away on Pembury Road. The level of noise was excessive and likely to cause a nuisance in the noise officer’s opinion. The Committee were advised that upon further investigation, a 3’x2’ speaker was found outside in the front garden area of the premises and the person in change was spoken to and the speaker was turned off and taken inside. Later at 05:00, Mr Buckle revisited the premises on a proactive visit and witnessed a large number of patrons leaving the premises one hour after its permitted closing time. Significant levels of noise was witnessed through laughing, talking and shouting and this was likely to cause a nuisance, especially by those patrons congregating in an area around 30 feet from residential premises. The traffic noise was notably increased by vehicles pulling up to collect patrons and driving away.  

 

Mr Pearce advised that, in response to flyers advertising events until 05:00, another proactive visit was undertaken at 04:30 on Sunday 31^st July 2016 and some 30 patrons were observed outside talking loudly with some patrons returning inside to the premises. No music was audible from outside. The noise generated was considered to be unreasonable and likely to cause a nuisance.

 

On Monday 1^st August 2016 at 03:30-03:50 Mr Buckle visited the location again, in response to a noise complaint. Parked at Pembury Road, approximately 50 yards from the venue, music was clearly audible along with voices from 15-20 patrons talking and shouting outside. The noise officer walked around the premises and observed that no doors or windows were left open and determined that the music was clearly being played too loud. The music should have finished at 03:30 but was still being played when the officer left at 03:50. Again, the noise generated from those outside and from the music was considered to be unreasonable and likely to cause a nuisance. 

             

In response to this representation, the Committee enquired whether there was a possibility of requesting that sound proofing be installed at the venue. Officers advised that a significant amount of the noise nuisance reported seemed to arise as result of doors and windows being left open and as a result of people congregating outside the venue. Cllr Rice raised concerns relating to late night noise nuisance and groups congregating outside of the venue being drunk and obstructing the pavement, on behalf of a complaint from a local resident which was attached at page 83 of the agenda pack.

 

d.         Applicant’s response to the representations

 

NOTED the representation by the applicant, Mr Mufwankolo, including that:

 

He had held a Premises Licence since 2010, managing a number of pubs and bars in and around Tottenham and in that time he had never been in any trouble with the Licensing Authority. In addition, Mr Mufwankolo advised that he had assisted Police during the Tottenham riots and had loaned his hard drive containing CCTV footage to the police to assist in their enquiries. Mr Mufwankolo also stated that the period in which the representation by Enforcement Response covered was a one week period from 25^th July to 1^st August and that this was very much an exception to the way the premises was usually managed.

 

In reference to the flyers submitted as evidence to the Committee, Mr Mufwankolo advised that he had no involvement in their production and that his name or contact details did not appear on the flyers. Mr Mufwankolo acknowledged that there was a speaker left outside of the venue on the 25^th July and stated that this was a mistake and that he immediately returned the speaker inside once it was brought to his attention. Mr Mufwankolo informed the Committee that he was undertaking every effort to reduce the noise being made by patrons outside of the venue and that during the visit by Mr Buckle on 31^st July he had put people back inside to reduce the noise emanating from outside the venue but there was no alcohol being sold. The licence holder reiterated that his patrons were often very threatening and abusive when he attempted to quieten them down or ask them to disperse after closing. Furthermore, the Police had previously advised him that managing the pavement outside his venue was not his responsibility.

 

Mr Mufwankolo informed the Committee that his licence only stipulated the need for 2 security staff but he currently employed 4 as he recognised his responsibilities and he wished to try and reduce the nuisance caused to his neighbours. Mr Mufwankolo reiterated that the noise was coming from people outside the venue and that was the source of complaints.

 

The Committee referred to Mr Mufwankolo’s written submission, as part of the licence review, at page 113 of the agenda pack. The Committee noted that the licence holder had offered to reduce his opening hours back to midnight and asked what impact that would have on his business. Mr Mufwankolo responded that this would have a very significant impact on his business. Mr Mufwankolo clarified that he did not want to have his licensing hours cut back but considered it during his submission, in the context of a worst case scenario, because he wanted to respect his neighbours.

 

The Licensing Team Leader informed the Committee that Mr Mufwankolo was never the named Premises Licence Holder on any of the other venues referred to in his submission. The Licensing Team Leader also advised that there had been a significant number of complaints relation to noise nuisance since 2010 and the complaints contained in the agenda pack were only those received as part of the consultation this licensing review process. The Committee were also formed that, as per the Section 182 guidance, Mr Mufwankolo had already installed signs inside his premises asking patrons to be quiet when they left the premises but that these were clearly not being respected.

 

Mr Charge suggested that a closing time 12am on a Sunday in a largely residential area was not clearly suitable and, he suspected, virtually unheard of.

 

21:50 the Committee retired to make a decision. Returned 10:20hrs

 

DECISION

 

The Committee carefully considered the application for a review of the premises licences, the representations made by the Licensing officer, the responsible authorities, the licence holder, the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy and the Revised Home Office Guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003.

The Committee was satisfied based on the evidence before it that public nuisance associated with the licensed premises had occurred both within the immediate vicinity of the premises and in the locality as well.

The Committee considered that it would be appropriate and proportionate to modify the license conditions in response to the evidence it heard because there was clear evidence of persistent noise nuisance and anti social behaviour directly associated with the premises.  The licensing objectives of promoting public safety, preventing crime and disorder and the prevention of public nuisance were not being upheld by the license holder.

The times during which the Licence authorises the carrying out of licensable activities are modified as follows.

The Committee also RESOLVED that the following alterations/conditions be made to the Licensing conditions.

That the premises close no later than 23:30 Sunday to Thursday and 00:30 Friday and Saturday.

That regulated entertainment ceases thirty minutes prior to closing time i.e. 23:00 hrs Sunday to Thursday and 00:00hrs (midnight) Friday and Saturday.

That the provision of late night refreshment and the supply of alcohol cease 30 minutes before closing on Friday and Saturday only.  The permitted hours are now:

Live Music and Recorded Music

Sunday to Thursday            1100 to 2300 hrs

Friday to Saturday               1100 to 0000 hrs

Amplified Music to be played until 30 minutes before closing time on days when live amplified music has been organised.

Provision of Late Night Refreshment

Friday and Saturday            2300 to 0000 hrs

Supply of Alcohol

Sunday to Thursday            1100 to 2300 hrs

Friday and Saturday            1100 to 0000 hrs

For consumption ON the premises only.

The opening hours of the premises:

Sunday to Thursday            0700 to 2330 hrs

Friday and Saturday            1100 to 0030 hrs

 

In addition to the conditions that already form part of the licence, the following conditions will now apply:

The licence holder will employ a minimum of two additional SIA approved doormen on Spurs home match days and on Friday and Saturday nights.

The license holder will also install a dedicated phone line for residents to contact him, in order to raise their concerns.

In addition to installing clearly legible signage reminding patrons to leave the premises quietly, the Committee recommends that the Licence holder introduce the use of security staff to act as marshals to ensure that patrons leave the premises quietly and keep noise in the surrounding streets to a minimum.

The Committee expressed that it takes the concerns raised by the responsible authority and the residents very seriously. The Committee strongly recommends that the licence holder engage in early and ongoing dialogue with the local residents. It is recommended that this could be achieved by the licence holder having scheduled meetings with the residents and or their representatives. The Committee also advises that the licence will be subject to further review if the conditions are not met.

The Committee approached its decision with an open mind and only reached a decision after having heard and considered the evidence of all the parties and considered that its decision was appropriate and proportionate in the circumstances.