| 13 | In attendance:
Surrey Police (responsible authority): Mr Murrae Hume
Mr David Talalay
Licence holder: Mr Gray Coe
Nominated Premises Supervisor Mrs Caroline Coe
The Sub Committee considered an application to vary the premises licence for Flirt Nightclub in order to designate Mrs Caroline Coe as the premises supervisor.
The application was before the Sub Committee because an objection on grounds of the prevention of crime had been made by Surrey Police, a responsible authority.
The report before the Sub Committee set out the relevant facts. Annexed to the report were copies of the application to vary the premises licence, the Police Objection Notice and statements made by the Police in support of their objection.
Prior to the hearing additional evidence was submitted by Mr Coe and circulated to all the parties, including a number of photographs taken of police officers outside the venue and statements made by both Mr and Mrs Coe.
It was noted that the Licensing Act 2003 specified that, where relevant objections had been received to the appointment of a new Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS), that DPS may take up the post until a decision had been taken upon their suitability by a Licensing Sub Committee.
Mrs Coe had been acting as the Designated Premises Supervisor since her appointment.
In the course of the hearing the following points were noted:
On behalf of Surrey Police:
• The previous DPS, Mr Gray Coe, had his licence withdrawn by a Licensing Sub Committee at its meeting on 20 May 2013. The reason for this was that Mr Coe had been convicted for possession of a Taser gun.
• At that time, Mr Coe had told a local newspaper that it would not be an issue because his wife would take over as DPS.
• There had been a litany of problems at the nightclub whilst Mr Coe was the DPS, with more incidents reported than at any other premise in the borough. It was a serious source of concern to the police.
• An experienced DPS was needed to manage the club and to improve its operations.
• The statements made by the police officers who had visited the premises, both before and after the removal of Mr Coe as DPS, indicated that there had been no improvement in the management.
• Mrs Coe could not respond to a number of questions from the police officers about the management of the premises, and seemed unaware of her obligations as the DPS.
On behalf of the licence holder:
• Mr Coe spoke first:
• He asserted that the statements made by the Police, one of which was unsigned and another of which was used to back-up a defective closure order, should be considered invalid.
• The Council's solicitor advised the Sub Committee that the statements made by the Police had been accepted as valid representations. This was not a criminal court and the statements were therefore admissible. It would be for the Sub Committee to decide how much weight it wished to place upon them as evidence.
• Mrs Coe then addressed the Sub Committee
• She had ten years experience as the manager behind a bar, as well as management experience from previous employment, and was keen to be given an opportunity to prove herself.
• Regular meetings were held with the staff, including the doormen and bar staff, and she was alive to the issues of under-age drinking and problems caused by drunkenness.
• She had passed the course to be a DPS, she was learning every day and should be given a fair chance to prove herself.
The Sub Committee then put questions to the parties and the following points were noted in the responses by Surrey Police:
• The number of incidents reported since Mrs Coe took over as DPS had not diminished, with at least two or three being reported each weekend.
• The type of incidents involved drunkenness, allegation of drug-taking, and assault, usually when people were leaving the club and under the influence of alcohol.
• The incident reports usually came from the club or its door staff which indicated that it was patrons from the club who were involved.
The parties were invited to make their closing submissions and the following additional points were noted:
Surrey Police:
• Flirt Nightclub was a problem venue. It had been badly run and still was.
• There had been no real reduction in the number of incidents.
• To all intents and purposes the premises were still being run by Mr Coe, as evidenced by the Police Statements which referred to Mrs Coe having to seek his guidance to answer their questions.
• The premises were in need of an independent and experienced DPS.
• The only person likely to be giving Mrs Coe any guidance was Mr Coe and the Police asserted that he was not the best of examples to follow.
• Mrs Coe was newly qualified and it was not appropriate for her to manage a bar of this size and with its history, bearing in mind her relationship to Mr Coe.
• There would be no effective difference in the management of the premises which made the decision to withdraw Mr Coe's licence as the DPS ineffective.
Mr Coe:
• The Police had not provided either himself or Mrs Coe with any support.
• Requests for interlink radios to contact other clubs and for drug bins or similar had been rejected.
• The Police were slow to respond to incidents that happened outside the club and yet their instructions to Mr Coe and the doormen was not to intervene.
• Mr Coe ran five other clubs and was no longer involved in the management of Flirt. It was Mrs Coe who now ran the premises.
• Mrs Coe had no criminal convictions and needed the support of the Police to be able to gain experience in her new role as DPS.
• It had proved very difficult to have a good working relationship with the Police, however, because of their attitude.
Mrs Coe
• No related incidents had occurred since she took over the management and the staff all respected her decisions.
• There had been no contact with the Police and it was not the case that they had had to deal with incidents since she took over.
• Mrs Coe had not made any direct contact with the Police to seek their support, because of their previous attitude and difficulties in communicating with them.
The Licensing Sub Committee adjourned to deliberate at 2.37 pm
and resumed at 3.21 pm
|