Licensing Sub Committee - Thursday 2 October 2025, 2:00pm - Tower Hamlets Council webcasts

Licensing Sub Committee
Thursday, 2nd October 2025 at 2:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 

Welcome to our Webcast Player.

The webcast should start automatically for you. 

Webcast cameras are not operated by camerapersons; they are automated and linked to speaker microphone units. The aim is to provide viewers with a reasonable visual and audio record of proceedings of meetings held in public.

Note: If your webcast link appears not to be working, please return to the Webcast Home Page and try again, or use the help email address to contact us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this agenda point

Good afternoon, everyone.
Welcome to the licencing subcommittee meeting.
My name is Councillor Shubo and I am the chair of the licencing subcommittee.
The meeting is being held in person.
Committee members and key participants are present in the meeting room and there may
be some people who are joining online.
The meeting has been filmed for the council's website and for public viewing.
I remind members at the meeting to only speak at my direction and to speak
clearly into the microphones to ensure contributions can be properly recorded.
Can members introduce themselves then I'll go on to officers starting with
Councillor Miao.
Councillor Sabine, I'm Stephanie Greenwood and I'm part of today's subcommittee.
Could I now get members to introduce themselves, please.
Officers.
Corinne Holland, Licencing Officer.
Simi Yasmin, Democratic Services.
Jonathan Melnick, Legal Advisor.
Thank you.
We have no apologies for absences today.
Do any of the members have any declarations of
discloseable pecuniary interest?
I will declare cheque.
Thank you.
Can members please note the rules of procedure on pages 9 to 18 of the agenda?
And now can members please note and agree the minutes of the meeting
held on 31 July. We will be varying the order of business today to consider item 4 .2 first
followed by 4 .1. Can Simi please announce the details?
Thank you, Chair. Item 4 .2 is the application to review, transfer and vary the DPS for the
premises licence for AM to PM food giant express 129 Whitechapel high street London E17PT.
Chair, so for today's meeting we have the applicant PC Karen Wells from the Metropolitan
Police. We have Alex Brandra from the trading standards and Mr. Ayn Saeed representing the
the applicant will be invited to speak and given a total of 10 minutes to make their
representation. All interested parties will also be getting 10 minutes each to make their
representation. I'll let each speaker know when they have one minute remaining. Please
note that the subcommittee have read the agenda pack in advance. Thank you, chair.
Because it's multiple applications within one, do you want to explain, Jonathan?
Excuse me, technically you've got, we are dealing with three separate applications,
you'll need obviously three decisions and technically the subcommittee should hear each
application separately, but the reality is in a case like this, where the licence is
being reviewed and the applicant, there's allegations that relate obviously to the person
who's the proposed transferree and proposed DPS, it simply makes sense all of the evidence
is ultimately going to be exactly the same. Rather than having three hearings at which
we all hear the same things three times, it's going to be far quicker and easier for everyone
if we roll them all up together and then the subcommittee will obviously deliberate accordingly.
Ultimately, it is, I think, only fair to give people the opportunity to object should they
wish to do so and then I can advise the chair accordingly but my experience is
that no one ever does. Hopefully today won't be changing that.
So is everyone good with that? Yeah? Cool. Can I now ask Corinne Holland, licencing officer,
to introduce the report please? Thank you chair. The first application is an
application for review of the premises licence for AM to PM which the licence
actually still has food giant Express on the licence it hasn't been changed yet
so just to save confusion it's 129 Whitechapel High Street and the review
was triggered by the police a copy of the review application is in appendix
In appendix 1, and that starts on page 106, in appendix 2, starting on page 115, there's
an index of evidence and I've put 1 .1 to 2 .0, and that's all the police evidence that relates
to this application.
This premise licence was issued in September 2004 and since October 2014, the premise licence holder and the DPS has been Mohammed Qureshi.
There has been a subsequent transfer and varied DPSH application and Mr. Aon Saeed has made
those and these have both been objected to which obviously we're hearing today as well.
A copy of the premise licence is within the police evidence in appendix 2 indexed as 2 .0
on page 136. Maps showing the location of the shop is in appendix 3 on page 147 and
some photographs are in appendix 4 on page 149. Trading standards have supported the
police review and their representation is in appendix 5 on page 153.
So that is the review application.
The transfer application was made by Mr. Ayan Sayed
and a copy of the transfer application is in appendix six
and this is on page 156.
The consent form is on page 162.
On the application form it did tick the box for an immediate effect of the transfer to take place.
Because of the police objection this is only an interim arrangement until the decision of this hearing today.
The procedure for changing the Premise Licence Holder is shown in 3 .1 on page 98.
As I said before, the premise licences in Appendix 2 marked as 2 .0.
The transfer application was received on the 3rd of July but became valid on the 17th of
July when the fee was paid. Only the police and the Home Office are consulted on a transfer
for a licence and the police can object if there's exceptional circumstances where they
believe a transfer may undermine the crime prevention objective. The police objection
is shown in appendix 7 on page 164 and they've got the same supporting evidence as the review.
The licencing committee can either refuse the transfer or they can grant the application,
but they can only consider matters that relate to the crime prevention objective.
And then the third application is a variation to the DPS and that was made by Mr. Said as well.
So any licenced premises to sell alcohol must have a DPS and a copy of that application
is in appendix 8 on page 166. This wasn't, the box to have an immediate interim effect
wasn't ticked on this application so it hasn't technically been changed at the moment. As
I said the licence is already in the in the police bundle. Since October 18 Mr.
Qureshi is the DPS and technically still is. The application was received on the
3rd of July but this wasn't paid for until the 29th of July when this
application became valid. The police objection to the variation to the DPS
is in appendix 9 and that's on page 173 and then likewise like the transfer the
committee can refuse the variation in exceptional circumstances but they can
only consider the crime prevention objectives thank you chair
thank you do members have any questions to the
Thank you for your presentation.
In terms of the transfer, what is the understanding from yourself?
Who is that current premises owner?
What is the understanding from the Council?
The transfer?
On the transfer, on an application there's a box to say do you want this to have immediate effect?
That was ticked on the transfer. So technically it has been transferred to Mr Said, but that's
sort of pending the decision of today. It's only until because of the police objection it's sort
of suspended, I suppose, for the decision to be made.
As in the very DPS, that box wasn't ticked.
Whether that was intentional or omitted, I don't know.
But obviously, that wasn't ticked.
So because of the police objection,
technically, Mr. Qureshi stays as the very DPS,
although obviously, we do realise he's actually
not at the premises anymore.
So it just occurred to me when I was speaking earlier, obviously only the police can deal
with the transfer and variation application.
It also means unlike other applications that come before this committee, there's no opportunity
for anyone else to make representations and support.
So just to clarify, Mr Brander's representation will only be talking to the review application
and not to anything else.
don't really want that coming back and causes problems later.
Thank you. Can I now ask the applicant to make their
representations. You have ten minutes. That's PC Kieran Wills.
Greetings councillors and chair. Thank you for hearing our application to
review the premises licence for a .m. to p .m. which is listed on the premises
licences through Giant Express located in Whitechapel High Street near All Gay East.
I'll start off today by just explaining briefly why we've requested that the application by
ourselves be heard along with the application to transfer and very DPS. We've asked for
the committee to hear all three, mostly because our concerns as a responsible authority with
the premises pertain to the ownership and management in respect of the breaches that
we've highlighted in our evidence as brought in the review application initially.
And those are very much relevant, we believe, to the named individual on the transfer as
well as the very DPS and that will highlight our exceptional circumstances
we believe. Most notably page 109 to 110 which is our initial review application
document as well as page 116 to page 118 which is a statement along with our
other evidence presented. We're of the belief from our visit that Mr. Syed has
been in charge of and running the premises for quite some time. We can't
say how long but there was no transfer and there was no very deep yes put in
prior to our visit. I'm just going to highlight some points and then go on to
review application documents. Apologies if I repeat myself on any of the points.
Referring specifically to page 116, which is the statement written by myself,
AM to PM was brought to our attention initially through relevant information
whereby which males who were seen and tracked by the London Borough of Tower Hamlet CCTV team
believed to be selling stolen goods to the shop, as was tracked and seen by CCTV, as referenced.
And that's what initially drew it to our attention.
After that, we did two subsequent visits.
Initially, we did it with trading standards in partnership, as well as with the local Safer Neighbourhoods teams,
due to the highlighted concerns.
Upon the visit on the 2nd of July, 2025,
there were a number of concerns we had
around the ownership.
Mr. Qureshi, namely, was listed as the premises owner
and the designated premises supervisor,
as well as some concerns specifically relating
into the prevention of crime and disorder,
as well as the other three licencing objectives,
which I'll go on to in a little bit.
Despite advice we gave to Mr. Raza,
who was the manager at the time,
as listed in my statement on page 116,
our subsequent visit carried out on the 21st of July,
showed that they were still trading,
despite advice that this would breach section 136 of the Licencing Act and
they were still in breach of a number of their licence conditions with no
apparent attempt to improve them despite issuing them with notifications of
alleged offences as well as warning letters sent directly to the person we
believed in charge of the premises Mr. Syed. I'm going to read off some of our
concerns as highlighted in page 109 and 110 around why we believe the current
owner Mr. Syed who we believe to be actually running the premises as opposed
to the gentleman listed on the premises licence Mohammed Qureshi who we do not
believe has been running the premises for a considerable time. So essentially
police licence team are applying to review the licence for AMS PM 129
and White Triple High Street.
On the basis of the venue not upholding 11
of their licence conditions on two separate occasions,
with no apparent attempt to remedy these licence breaches
while selling alcohol and having alcohol out for display.
The licencing objectives that the venue is in breach of,
as we believe, cover all four of the licencing objectives,
and I'll go on in a little bit to explain why,
but prevention of crime and disorder, public safety,
protection of children from harm and prevention of public nuisance.
Conditions 1 to 10 and conditions 15, which are the conditions that are namely in breach,
cover the CCTV conditions pertaining to crime and disorder.
It also covers the refusal logs pertaining to protection of children from harm,
the incident log, training records, personal licence holders and their need to be on the premises,
training records for staff, noise nuisance conditions and challenge 25
conditions as is highlighted in their licence. A notification of offences was
served on the shop and that was on the 2nd of July on our initial visit 2025.
Our second visit came on the 21st of July and there was no noticeable effort
to improve the conditions they were still in breach as best as we could see.
We spoke to the staff, we made inquiries. On the second occasion when we visited,
there was still alcohol on display, despite the advice we gave them on the
2nd of July, which was to not display it for sale until they had addressed those conditions.
With respect of the stepped approach, we had spoken to Mr Syed on the phone.
I spoke with Mr Syed previously and I had also sent Mr Syed warning letters in the past.
There was no viable option with respect of the stepped approach as is our licencing policy,
as we believed, due to the nature of breaching twice on both visits.
We do not believe that any conditions or changes imposed on the licence or the licence holder will be followed or upheld.
and as such we have no constant confidence in the licence holder mr.
Syed police believe revocation of the licence is the only option available at
this stage it's unclear how long the premises have not been following these
conditions whilst on scene originally we spoke to mr. Raza we did make inquiries
around mr. Qureshi and his his location and whether or not he was reachable
with respect to the premises, we got very vague answers.
Many of the breaches were highlighted as stated
along with the letter we sent.
I just wanna highlight as well,
with respect of the initial visit
and what caused our concern
with respect to prevention of crime and disorder.
We received a call as I stated that people believed that they were selling stolen goods inside the premises.
Police did attend. Spoken to Mr Ali Raza at the time.
The allegation or suspicion was that they were selling stolen chocolate bars.
Subsequently when officers attended and walked into the store,
officers stated that they saw Mr Raza stocking the shelves with boxes of double -decker chocolate bars.
Mr Raza gave the defence at the time that it had come from the cash and carry.
Officers asked to cheque the CCTV, but he stated only his managers had access.
He provided the details of Mr Syed.
He said that the CCTV footage automatically deletes after two days, but he wasn't certain.
So with respect to prevention of crime and disorder, in that instance, we don't believe that the licence holder is capable of upholding those,
specifically talking with respect to Mr Syed, who we believe is running the premises,
And that is the reason for our objection to the premises licence transfer and the very DPS
transfer
As well as our review on this occasion
And our request for the committee to consider revocation of the licence as we don't believe there is any other alternative
And that's it for myself
Thank you for that can I now ask
We have a couple of questions.
The first one is about the interest of parties to make the representation.
We have Alex.
Good afternoon, Councillors.
Thank you for this opportunity to present our representation.
I am representing the Council of trading standards service.
We are in support of the police's application to review the licence for AM to PM.
Our representation is based on the provincial crime disorder objective.
As it has been alluded to, we supported the visit with the police on 2 July 2025 to AM to PM.
On that occasion we found 67 single -use vapes displayed for sale on the premises, which we seized and detained.
Now the ban on single -use disposable vapes came into force in England on the 1st of June 2025.
So a month after the ban came in, there were still single -use vapes displayed for sale.
There was no reasonable excuse why any business should still have these vapes available for sale.
It's a criminal offence to supply these at that time and it was widely publicised.
So there's no excuse for any retailer to still have them available.
The shop had a mixture of the new and old vapes available and it was quite easy to determine which were older ones because they had disposable written on the packaging.
So on that basis we consider that the management of the business is poor and there's a disregard to regulations that would help improve the environment.
Furthermore, the price marking order 2004 requires that traders indicate a selling price for products.
Failing to do so is an offence under the Prices Act 1974.
There are very, very few products priced for sale at the shop, which is again an indication of very poor management and compliance with the law.
So overall, as I say, we lack confidence in the ability or willingness of the owner to uphold licencing objectives regarding crime disorder and therefore support the police's application for a review.
Thank you.
I think
Before asking questions to the applicant lists, I think if we hear from
the preferences licence holder
I inside
please
Thank you very much
I
very respect the law
I am running this business from last round 10 years and I never been involved in any
this type of activity or such.
This premises was closed for four years
or almost three years since COVID
because Mr. Kuraishi is my family member.
So his mother got ill and he went to Pakistan and he didn't
and that's why the premises was closed.
I took over from him,
but unfortunately her mom passed away and he came back
and we are running like a family member,
like I am the responsible of this premises.
Since I opened it after three years,
I started to like provide everything in that.
That was my mistake.
I admitted that there was some condition wasn't preparing.
I spoken to the officer over the phone
when he came on 2nd of July.
and I told that my mother got the cardiac arrest and her surgery was in process and from last couple of months I was in Pakistan.
The 2nd of July it was happened and I came back on 6th because I am responsible for that and since the day I came,
I was attacked while coming out of prayers. I was attacked the police report I have, if you can see.
I have the police report and I was attacked fully and there wasn't, I was lying on the road.
I have the pictures to prove as well because there are three persons who attacked me, even they are trying me to kill.
I have all the records as well.
I was lying on the road for one and a half hour.
The police came after one and a half hour.
Then I called, they dropped me to home.
They ran away with my car keys.
All the reports are there.
And then I called 999, the ambulance,
and they said they can't give me assistance
or they don't have any NHS don't have anything to do because if anybody is lying or dying from this
even then I went back I took my medical from my own country because in the country which I am
running my business and everything was there the record is here oh even despite of that
I bought a new CCTV camera, but unfortunately because I am not in that condition to put these things back
I asked my staff and took the appointments, everything because I am responsible
So I made sure that after these things happen, it will not happen in future
All the records I have, there are 3 -4 persons, they came regularly to my shop
and I have even proved you the video, they broke my shop totally.
I don't know what's there behind if I have a life threat,
so I can't be here in that country, but police probably you can see.
Mr. Said, can you turn that off for a second?
Yes, sir. Can you press, turn it off?
We can hear your incident after.
can we stick to some of the issues that the applicant have mentioned please if that's okay
and I'm sorry to hear what you went through. Yeah sir after that when I come I fixed all the
issue but unfortunately this was the reason I was little bit late from 2nd to 21st of July
otherwise all the things I even I now asked my all the staff to do the personal lessons because now
I have two lessons, I have the personal lessons, now I applied for every staff, they must be trained and they will not do anything in future.
And I myself is taking care of that and in future there shouldn't be anything breach would happen.
So I will try my best to be responsible citizen, not like, because, and one more thing they mentioned.
we have an area, you can say the fridge wasn't working, we put the things on the storage for that.
And the officer mentioned that we just put the notice that nothing for sale on that, and this is only for storage.
For example, there is a picture of milk which they mentioned that.
That is for return if we have to place something for return because any product which are expired
We will put in that area for return. So that is also in the list
So we made the all the guidelines which officers asked us and in future there wouldn't be anything
happened I will try my best to be the law because I
am
I was with my mother because I am the only one.
I came back since they called me.
I took a flight.
They came to second.
I took a flight on sixth.
Since I came, I was coming out of mosque and that happened with me.
I don't know on the review what happened on 21.
I have all the documents.
the police reports and record with me because of these things I was bit so
rigid and after that everything was fulfilled thank you thank you just in
relation to some of the the issue that mr. cider is raising in relation to his
attack which my understanding you know that clarify with him relates to why
things weren't done between visit one and visit two obviously you can only
take into account documentary information with the consent of all of
the parties at the hearing. Now it may well be relevant so rather than before
you ask questions I don't know if Mr. Brand or PC Wells have seen this document
but can I perhaps suggest that if both of you look at what Mr. Syed has
produced and if you're happy for the committee to see it then that's fine and
they can obviously we'll have a look at it and they can consider but obviously
If either of you object to that, then it won't go in,
but I don't want Mr. Saide to not get
at least the opportunity to try to put that in
before the committee,
because it clearly could perhaps be relevant.
Mr. Saide, if you show that to the officers,
that lesson to the officers, yeah.
Yeah, we've got no issue with this being seen and like, yeah, you know, do you want to show
your picture to them as well?
Okay.
Is the dates in line?
Yeah, the date is in line.
I'm just going.
Sorry, can I just suggest rather than having a dialogue between the past, obviously everything
should go through the chair.
Mr Said, anything you want to explain, you do it this way.
Even if it's to them
You're happy for the picture to be seen as well when are you
Yeah, we've not got an issue with that and just for transparency as well
Mr. Syed had sent me that report but absolutely no contacts like no contacts whatsoever in the email initially
I mean like I say gain is really more. I don't know what's gonna be in that letter
Sorry, if you just turn your but and it's more to make sure obviously one that mr
Said is he has the opportunity to put forward whatever it is that he wants to say
And also, but at the same time that neither you nor mr. Brand are being ambushed by something so that that's also thing
That was on the 6th of July
I have my attention because I was out of country at that time and that was my intention to
fix that's why I left my mom because only one son of my parents.
So I left my mom in hospital and I came back for only the less than six when I heard that
that this was happening and that happened to me.
≫ All right, let's move into the questions and we can ask
about your flight details, et cetera, after.
Do members have any questions to any of the parties?
Councillor Lagerter.
Thank you chair just to get the timeline
Just to understand the timeline in terms of for example the incident about
the change of
the supplying of
vapes found at the shops
I
Think it was July the second that
It was a national kind of government news that all shops cannot have or should be selling the single -use ones
Were you aware of this? Also were you present in the UK?
I would suggest, quite often, and particularly when applicants are unrepresented, if you ask multiple questions you'll probably get an answer to none of them.
So perhaps if you just ask one question at a time it will make it a fire -easer.
The first question is about the vapes. So were you aware and were you at the premises then?
and then I've got a question to the officer as well.
Did the shop get kind of that information given
that no sales can be made a sector?
So one to the applicant, one to the officer.
Yes, madam, I was aware that and we heard about
there is a rep company who will come
who provide us sometimes the waves because the mostly are the the slow selling wave which
sometime that
People come and give us for free as a sample that wasn't sale and the company said they will come and collect it and I inform
My staff that they will come and collect but unfortunately they didn't remove from display
But ninety five percent of the waves are compliance waves there, but that's my mistake I can
Can I just come in, Che? So they were displayed to sell?
I informed that we weren't selling them, but they didn't remove from that area.
Were you at the premises? Were you in the country?
I was out of country, Madam.
To the officer, in terms of, we all know that the Vapes were not allowed to sell,
but what kind of support local businesses or this business was given or prior
notices if there were any
A male shot should have been sent out to every single known
Sales rapes I
Don't have the information to confirm
This shop was concluded or not, but I may also say it should have been sent to every single business known to sell babes
this is prior to
the band coming into force on the first of June.
Can I answer that? We heard from the cash -in -carries, all the...
Yeah, you asked me.
Sir, we heard from the wholesalers that this type of wave are banning, ok?
They are not selling and the pre -filled are coming.
But the stock which was left, we don't... nobody tell that what to do with that stock.
because we bought that from some of the stock with money to either to throw it
what to do with that but we didn't get any guidance what to do with the stock
which didn't sell by that time. Because the wholesaler aren't buying back.
Thank you.
Councillor Miao.
the business or any business? Before that, I was running the Roxy store business and
the Dixie chicken, the fast food. So you seem like someone very experienced for a very long
time and you kind of know the laws and the guidance that are there, especially in the
entire hamlets. And then now you're saying because of the circumstances, very sorry for
that, you were abroad. I'm sure it is your responsibility to make sure your staff know
and trained and supported of how to, the very basics and the laws and guidance are there,
especially when there was a visit from the police.
I'm sure your staff have told you.
Did you speak to the staff afterwards
to reassure what to do, what not to do, and kind of step in?
Because you do seem like a very experienced businessman,
and it's very normal.
People do go around.
Not all the business owners are always at the premises.
It's your responsibility to make sure your staff are up to date
with all the laws and guidance and what not to do, what is expected.
Yes madam, the first visit when they came I strictly told that if you will found everything
do the inspection, if we have anything like that remove that and dispose that off. Even
don't return it instead of that or waiting for me dispose it off straight away. I informed
So, before the incident, the visits or after?
I informed them before the visit that because I was out of country not to buy any disposable
way from anywhere because that was the old stock which was we bought before the law was
implemented.
So, that was I strictly told that we all the things we bought from the best way or the
and the Mecha group which are the biggest cash and carry out deliveries regularly came from them
and most of the time I will make sure, all the time I would make sure
mostly if I was out of country even then I was ordering online via Bestway app
so I stopped them not to buy from any even the wraps or anywhere even they are selling the cheaper as well
Thank you
I wasn't just speaking about the rapes in terms of like
goods out of date this kind of the normal standards that I expected
so not just particularly on rates like
The support or the guidance were they given to the staff and when you did have the kind of warnings and the visits
That kind of support your staff
They needed that right
Madam after that when they came first time after that there isn't any such thing in the shop like
No, such waves all the waves in the shop or after that would be the from the legal
Which are now pre -filled?
So it's not pretty it's not just about the waves I'm talking about the standards like out -of -date goods or selling alcohol
a hole that you are not supposed to. Madam, we make sure that I gave the training
to the staff. All the staffs are now trained with the premises
lessons. There is a course that happened for all the staff.
We have done Mr. Huzaifa and Ali Raza now are the current supply, lessons holder as
well. Now, because normally there will be a training,
but now I ask them to done the course. Huzaifa and Ali Raza now done the course and now they
they got the premise lessons as well.
Could you confirm what training course your colleagues went to? There is level 2
alcohol licencing training course. And how many staff do you have within your
store
three stops and fourth one is me and
This is to I think the
applicant do
Way was mentioned that something's not ticked has it been ticked now or?
As I think in relation to
Was about the application that that's not relevant for this
That's just about how quick you know whether the application takes a meatiest effects or not
You don't need to worry about that
And I want in relation to some of their pictures I saw the eggs was what was wrong with eggs was our date
So just just in in reference to the relevance of it obviously from our perspective
in terms of food safety
the food safety regulations, obviously alcohol is considered a food and the storage of it
and the maintenance of it. In terms of the eggs, the dates were not present, whereas
on some of the packaging they were, it wasn't clear whether or not, I wouldn't hazard a
guess as to whether or not it was rubbed off, but it just wasn't present on the packaging,
therefore making it unsafe. I think I'll probably have to jump in it's just as a
matter of law I mean obviously certain foods need to have used by dates or best
by dates and from memory eggs have best by dates so that wouldn't be an offence
but it would if any of the food does have a used by date and it's being sold
after that that would be an offence similarly where food is being sold as is
described is obviously mouldy and what have you it's clearly unfit for human
consumption and would be a breach of the food safety and hygiene regulations 2013.
Can I answer that as well?
Because all the eggs which come from only one supplier to mostly 80 % shop in the London
and I don't think so any date never been removed or anything was missed because that was on
the bottom shelf we displayed mostly because if anything eggs are like lightweight if it
will fall down or something will happen.
That's why they are on the bottom shelf.
Because if they're on the top shelf
and sometimes customers pick it up and they drop it,
then that's why we put them in the bottom shelf.
Thank you.
Council Agter, do you have any more questions?
Sorry, just to add chair.
So you're saying the bottom shelf
still had the utter, you know, day.
There wasn't anything out of date in that.
There wasn't any out of date.
Okay.
Nothing was out of date in the act.
Can I now ask Mr. Mennonick to ask some questions you've got?
Yes, I've got some questions just for clarification and to assist you.
To PC Wells, one of the things I noticed in the witness statement,
obviously it said that there's various breaches of licence
in terms of things like training records and what have you,
But it doesn't say in the statement that at any point anyone was asked for those
Can you clarify whether those questions were asked or not, please?
Yeah, apologies
That's an oversight by myself. It was in the body one video evidence exhibited by myself. I
Appreciate it's just in reference and the videos not supplied but we did ask the questions to originally. Mr. Raza
As through the conditions we went through the whole licence with him
I'd like to say again because it's not in the statement we obviously haven't seen the
body worn so it's obviously I need to make sure the questions that or points that Mr
Syed might make were he represented or before the committee.
Is there any update obviously in your the email about the section 9 misuse of drugs
act investigation that's dated the 10th of July so I was wondering if you're able to
Appreciated it's still under esta they may not be but is there any update on that?
As far as I'm aware
It's still under investigation
Mr. Syed himself might know better than I
But last I checked it
I'll refrain from asking mr. Syed. I think I don't want him to say anything that he might regret
And I'm excited to Mr. Syed, I just want to make absolutely certain that the licencing
subcommittee are absolutely clear as well.
You are responsible for the business, yes?
Yes, sir, I am responsible for the business.
And you've been responsible for the business for about three or four years, yes?
No, sir.
This shop was opened like last year.
This was closed and our family member, Mr. Kure, she's running, but from me it's from
last year.
and he was not in the country because of his sign,
we need to transfer the DPS
because his sign wasn't available.
That's why when he came to London,
I signed from him and send it to them.
You have been responsible for the business
for the last year, correct?
So you are respond,
and so you're the, effectively the beneficiary,
the people in the shop work for you, yeah?
Thank you very much.
Any other questions?
All right, now moving on to concluding remarks. Each party will have one minute each. So I'll start
off with Mr. Said. Sir, I am very thankful to the chair and officers and the council members and I
am law abiding citizen not law breaking and I will make sure that if anything was wrong happened in
I have a big apology on that and in future I will make sure myself that
everything is all the records everything even there is one more food hygiene
people came and he asked me about to do some things and like hot water and
change of life I done everything with them as well and if anything gonna be
I will make sure that nothing wrong will be happen only the
positive thing
Thank you. Thank you now. Can I hear from the applicant please?
Just to surmise and sum up I appreciate and acknowledge
What mr. Side has said?
With respect to this crime report. However, I'd just like to highlight to the committee
that on our first visit we made it very clear to Mr Raza, who was the manager at the time,
that until those licencing breaches were addressed, that he should not sell alcohol and it should not be out for display.
Upon our second visit, despite our email to Mr Syed and despite our letters to Mr Syed,
the alcohol was still on display and all the breaches were still in place,
As well as the other issues around stolen goods and food safety at this stage
We still have no confidence in this society running the business
Thank you now can I hear from Alex Brenda, please
Thank you chair. Yes, just to summarise. I think we can see there's been multiple
Examples of a lack of professional diligence in the management of this
shop and Mr. Saeed has acknowledged that he was fully aware that single -use
vapes had not been for sale at his shop and he knew of the data came in and yet
they were still there. So I think that's again just an example of his inability to map.