Licensing Sub Committee - Thursday 13 November 2025, 6:30pm - Tower Hamlets Council webcasts

Licensing Sub Committee
Thursday, 13th November 2025 at 6:30pm 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

An agenda has not been published for this meeting.

Good evening and welcome to Licencing Subcommittee.
I'm Councillor Abdim Ahmed, I'm chairing tonight's subcommittee.
This meeting is being held in person.
Committee members and key participants are present in the room.
And there may be some participants joining remotely.
This meeting is being filled for the Council's website and public viewing.
I'd remind members of the meeting and key participants to speak in my direction and
speak clearly into the microphone to ensure that contributions can be properly recorded.
Can I now ask members and officers to introduce themselves.
Jonathan.
Good evening, I'm Jonathan Melnick, Legal Advisor to the sub -quasi.
Hi, my name is Amina Ali, I'm a Councillor Bo East.
Good evening all, Councillor Farouk, wife of Wood.
Simi Asmin, Democratic Services.
We have no apologies for absences.
Can I now ask if members have any
disclosure of
their interests?
I don't have
anything to declare, but I'm the ward
Councillor of the
particular
application.
No, I have none, Chair.
Thank you.
That's not a DPI, but I appreciate
transparency, so thank you.
We'll move on.
Can members please
make the rules before we
procedure on pages 9 to 18 in the Agenda pack.
We did have two applications tonight but it's worth noting that application 1, the first
one has been resolved prior to the meeting so we will move straight on to application
number 2.
Simi, can I ask you to introduce attendees to please?
Thank you, Chair.
Item 3 .2 is the application for a new premises licence for midpoint 112216 Whitechapel Road,
London E1 1je. Today's chair we have the applicant present Mr.
Mohammed Al Mamun and his licencing representative Mr. Moses Ecolay.
As for the objectives we have Mr. Moshun Ali representing licencing authority who is present
at the meeting room. We have Mr. Onohola Oleri who is environmental
health and is joining online. And we have PC Karen Wells from the Metropolitan
Police who is also joined online. After the application has been presented the
applicant will be given a total of five minutes to make their representation.
The objectors will also receive five 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 packet in advance.
Many thanks.
Thank you, Celine.
Can I now invite Kathy Driver, Licencing Officer, to introduce the report.
Thank you, Chair.
As correctly pointed out, the application is for Midpoint at 112 -116 Whitechapel Road,
that's London E11JE.
The application is for a premises licence for late night refreshment only from Monday
to Sunday until 3am, including those hours they wish to have non -standard timings, which
is during the month of Ramadan to extend till 5am, which would effectively allow the premises
to operate 24 -7 for that month.
The hours open on normal operation times is Monday to Sunday from 10 to 3am.
The site plan is included at page 88 with the maps and photos at 90 and 92.
There are a list of premises in the close proximity to the venue at page 96.
The objections made are by the licencing authority at page 98, including with that there is supplementary
agenda from the licencing authority. The police is detailed at page 107. Environmental health
at page 112. There is a residence couple that's subjected to the licence application at page
and a business at page 129.
That really concludes my presentation, Chair, unless you've got any further questions.
Thank you very much. Do members have questions for licence officer?
No, just one point of clarification.
So this application, or this premises is in the CIS, is that correct?
Yes it is.
Okay, that's fine, we'll come on to other questions.
Can I now ask the applicant to make the presentation? You have up to five minutes and soon we will indicate when you've got one minute remaining.
Thank you Chairman. My name is Moses Akole. I'm acting as an agent speaker on behalf of my client here, the applicant.
The details of the site are already being explained.
That's 112116 White Chapel Road.
It is a restaurant which has been operating for three years, approximately.
Currently the restaurant is open from about nine o 'clock in the morning to eleven p .m.
They have full -time staff seeks and then part -time too.
Access can be gained from Whitechapel Road or from Vine Court.
The context is mostly commercial.
Along the Whitechapel Road is commercial.
At the back, there's also commercial above the restaurant offices, office uses.
So there is no residential reasons above the restaurant.
The applicant is applying to increase the hours of opening, from 11 in the night to
5 during Ramadan for only one month in a year and then the other parts of the year up to
But I would need to submit here that the
applicant will want to amend the hours and
I request the committee to give that's opportunity to do that
So the applicant wants to remove the Ramadan month
and
To reduce the hours from 3 to 2
Monday to Monday to Sunday
OK.
So we have reviewed the objections submitted
from all the other neighbours and the authorities,
calling the police and the licencing team.
They broadly related to those objections,
which appear to not to comply with the different
sensible objectives. So things to do with the potential increase in the crime, so
failing to address the crime and disorder and nuisance and noise and
littering of the place, no anti -social behaviour, the public safety, you know,
includes sanitation, food preparation, rubbish, waste, food waste and disposal
and the other one is the protection of children's harm.
I believe that according to the objectives that this development will fail to the increase
in the hours in those conditions in the place.
But I want to submit it to the members that the objections appear to be already established
and they relate more with the activities happening along the vine court, especially at the back.
This is a restaurant which faces the Whitechapel Road and everything happens indoors.
So there is really limited congregation of people to the front there, apart from those
who just passed on the pavement.
So in terms of the waste disposal, yes, there is the foodstuff there that was waste, but
the council provides this.
So willing this or taking this doesn't make noise.
They normally bring this.
There's a regimen to the local authority to dispose this every day in the morning hours.
So we noted that there is an officer who went there at a certain time, a certain point to
to carry out a purchase test, which is okay in terms of law.
They could be having that right.
But I also want to submit here that the premises does not have the land sense.
So while the investigation is going on, that could have been better if the conditions were
put in place.
So the land sense is really very, very important here to bring these all concerns into control.
So the solution that applicants have in place is the CCTV installation.
They already have CCTV, they are willing to put more CCTV to the front to improve safety.
They are also happy to bring the logbook in place to make sure they pick up all the records of any crimes reported on a fault with the CCTV.
They are also happy to close at least 30 minutes before the time of mandatory closing time
in order to allow for their customers to leave and prepare the place.
And the deliveries, they are also expected to come from 7 to 10 in the morning rather
than in the night.
Any other vehicles, really, they don't really have more takeaways there.
They don't really park in the front or anything like that.
So that can also, all the concerns could be controlled
by way of a licence with the conditions.
And that could also help the council
to actually control these issues if they breach any of them.
So that is my request that a licence which is reduced
in hours up to two o 'clock would actually be appropriate
in that place and also mitigate a lot of concerns there
if they can do support this development.
Thank you very much.
Can I just confirm two points?
You said you're going to remove the Ramadan licencing hours,
and you happy to reduce from 3 AM to 2 AM.
Yep, OK.
Thank you very much.
I just wanted to make that noted.
Right, we'll move on to the objectives of the application
to make the representation.
You have five minutes each.
I'll start with licencing.
Thank you, Chair.
The licencing and authorities representation is within pages 99 -206,
and there's also supplemental pages 3 and 4 in the additional evidence.
The authorities making representation under the Prevention of Crime and Disorder,
and the Prevention of Public Nuisance, Licencing and Objectives.
My representation outlines the reasons for the objection,
so I won't go in too much detail because it's already on there,
but I'll highlight some of the key points.
You'll note that there is a long history of complaints
from residents about the Vine core area.
The residents make point of this,
the environmental protection, I'll
focus particularly on the actual premises and the licencing
issues.
So if you look at the history, licencing
were aware of this since 21st of February, 2025,
where they attempted to make an application.
However, the application was rejected as the plans were inadequate.
So since then, they haven't made an attempt to reapply.
And then this year, 9th of August, 2025, licence and authority visited the premises
and were able to purchase food after 11pm when they currently don't have a licence, as you've heard.
The warning letter was then sent on 16th of September, along with the record of contact.
I was left with the business at the time.
And also the letter highlighted the fact that they were advertising later hours on the website.
So it highlighted all the problems in terms of the licencing act.
Since then there has been no contact made by the applicant to the licenced authority in order to mitigate any of these concerns.
Most recently we've had a test purchase on my latest evidence that's been submitted.
Failed date test page is on the 25th of October 2025, where they sold hot food to officers after 11pm.
If you look at the photo on page 3, it shows you that the photo was taken at 8 minutes past 1 on the 25th of October.
Just a clarification point, it says 102.
102 refers to the date, to the time that's on the actual receipt.
So the 102 refers to the time of the receipt, and the 108 is the actual time of the photo.
So that is the latest offence, and this has currently been investigated with a potential view to take legal action.
In conclusion, the applicant is fully aware of the licence net.
In the past we say on a balance of probability,
but in this case I've shown you that the applicant knew that they needed licence,
they were warned the fact that they needed licence,
and then they carried on knowing they needed licence
and still carried on trading until past one o 'clock without licence.
Despite these warnings, this is a blatant disregard for the licencing laws.
The licence will suggest that even if you grant this licence,
the potential licence holder will not uphold the licence objectives
and they will not meet the conditions and the times of the licence as it's been proven.
So that's a summary of my objection unless members have any further questions. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Can I now invite Environmental Health to make the representation please.
You have up to five minutes. Thank you, Chair. My name is Oleri, I'm a
romantic protection officer for our noise team. I'm grieving, Chair members. My representation
tonight we just summarise the objections with regards to midpoints application based on
public nuisance. Just in summary, summary of this application is about the applicant
seeks late night refreshment from 10am to 3am daily. I'm aware that he has revises hours
to 2M. These hours substantially exceed the Council's framework hours. Extending
threading onto 3M presents a clear and foreseeable risk of public nuisance.
Chair members, my representation will highlight the environmental protection concerns.
The applicant proposes threading hours that extend significantly beyond the established framework
and experience consistent issues that activities operating
into the early morning increases the likelihood
of noise disturbance and social behaviour.
This excessive extension allow alone
warrant serious scrutiny.
Let me just give you a background of VineCodes.
VineCodes has been a persistent hotspot
for social behaviour over a decade.
Residents report consistent nightly disturbance.
issues include shouting, loitering, smoking and congregation late into the night.
Members, vine cut is not an imagined problem, it is an entrenched one.
Residents have endured nightly disruption for many years.
I'm not saying that midpoint is directly involved, but any premises operating late
into the night adjacent to this location or this type of location or hospital,
inevitably interacts with these issues and risk worsening them.
The context of the area most weigh heavily in your assessment tonight.
Residence complaints, regular shouting and raised voices late at night.
Littering and widespread battle not spanned spitting.
Smoking users entering home, rat activity associated with improper food waste disposal.
These complaints demonstrate a long -standing pattern of public nuisance with genuine impact
on prison health, sleep and well -being.
The evidence shows that the community faces frequent and intrusive disturbance.
Allowing additional late night activity in this location would almost certainly compound
these harms, Chair members.
A proposed operating schedule lacks specificity and enforceability.
No detail or credible disposal strategy for 3 a .m. closing time.
No substantive measures to control loitering or smoking outside the premises.
As I say, the schedule is insufficient for the level of risk posed.
The measures described are generic, unquantified and offer limited confidence that public nuisance
will be prevented.
High risk locations like this require strong, proactive and demonstrable controls.
Chair, what we are doing here is trying to scan the horizon and just be proactive because
of the problem we foresee that this is going to cause.
Experiences that veterans living at 3M are more likely to linger, smoke, converse loudly
sick shelter areas like the foreign court is a hub for these type of issues. And increasing
food for at 3am is more certainly likely and will pose problems to residents. Environmental
protection, we must consider the practical impact on the community. In this instance,
granting the application will be incompatible with the licencing objective of preventing
public nuisance. The risk is not theoretical, Chair. It is supported by years of complaints
and officer knowledge of the area. In conclusion, Chair, the combination of excessive hours
and sensitive location like brand code and inadequate operating schedule creates a clear
and unacceptable risk of public needs.
For this reasons, Mr. Chair,
environmental petition respectfully recommend
that the refusal of this application.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you very much.
Can I now invite the police to make the presentation?
You've up to five minutes.
Thank you very much, Chair.
Thank you, committee members, councillors.
Appreciate your time.
With respect, I'll try not to repeat
too much of what has already been discussed and said by environmental protection and licencing.
In essence, for Vine Court, there is a long standing history of antisocial behaviour,
crime and disorder that's not limited to but includes drug use, shouting into the
hours of the night, that has had a significant impact on the lives of residents that live there.
And whilst, as pointed out, there are no residents directly above the premises, there are residents
in direct proximity to this premises.
Vinecorp has had long -standing issues
with our safer neighbourhood teams.
There has been long -standing issues
with antisocial behaviour and licenced premises breaching.
As pointed out by the licencing team,
there have been breaches recorded here.
So while police were not wholly against
this licence application to begin with,
and we did try to propose conditions
and reduced hours for this application,
At this present time, our recommendation has since changed to being against this licence
application as it stands at the moment. In respect of crime and disorder, we believe that on the
balance of probabilities, if the premises is allowed to open into the hours of the night at
3am on a regular basis, we do not believe the applicant has sufficiently suggested any conditions
that are enforceable that will promote the licence and objective requirement disorder.
We have tried previously to suggest conditions to the applicant. We got no reply to those.
With respect of the prevention of public nuisance, as stated previously, this licence premises
would be in the community of impact zone. We do believe this would have a knock on effect
on the residents that live there. We do believe this would contribute on the balance of probabilities
to noise and disorder as well as crime and disorder. In essence, there are little conditions
offered. There is little confidence inspired by the applicant through this process as well as the
breaches that have been noted and the lack of communication to this point. We appreciate on this
occasion that he may have offered reduced hours, but even 2am on a weekday, there aren't
enough conditions in place and we have no confidence that the applicant will be able
to promote the licencing objectives. And that's it from us. Thank you.
Thank you very much. We'll now move to questions from members. I will start with one to the
applicant, if that's okay. In your application, your representation, you don't talk very much
about being in the community impact zone.
So I just want to understand if you could talk a bit more
about the steps you're going to be taking,
given you've heard from the objectors
and some of the concerns they have.
What mitigations are you putting in place to deal with that?
Yes.
Your, Matt.
Okay.
I have heard what the police have said
than an environmental officer.
But I would really want to put it forward.
That is a bit more generic here, as I spoke earlier.
So I'm speaking specifically on this particular application,
and that's a unit that is seeking for a licence.
Now, the applicant is committed to making amends.
It is not denying that he failed the test, but they don't want to repeat this kind of
thing.
I would suggest that the police job is actually to make sure we deter the crime, we deter
this kind of thing, bring things under control, and the environmental officer would be able
to have something to enforce.
So, the additional CCTV will actually improve on crime because if the congregation of people
there, the gathering of people can be attracted and the social behaviour amounts from that,
then something CCTV will retain exactly that CCTV in operation, both at the pavement there
and also inside at the entrance or over the place, will actually be on the benefit of
police also to support them in investigations of the crimes beyond this
particular location. So the applicant has a theory and is willing to put
appropriately in the proper locations there that all the blind spots too.
This CCTV footage will be available to the police or any other authority that
respond on request. The security officer, the applicant is
to recruit a security officer to be around to improve on the security of the place during
this hour.
So they are considering an officer who, a company that is accredited by the Security
Industrial Authority, who will be standing there in those particular hours in the evening,
who will also help to disperse anybody that is congregating around these particular premises.
Again, I'm speaking about the site of the premises land, not as a whole of the vine
courtyard.
I'm speaking specifically here because the issues might be beyond what the applicant
can solve, but he can contribute even more to solving the issues that have been sitting
there for a long time without actually the authorities seeking for solutions.
I see this as an opportunity that we can't let go.
I plead to you like that.
A logbook will pick up, will condition them to take records of any faults on the CCTV,
any crimes reported in the area, any complaints brought to them.
These are all the things that they are willing to take in the mitigation of those concerns.
Then the other presence of at least two people, staff, are the premises in the evenings, you
know, to make sure that there is proper management of the place, especially from two o 'clock,
finishing the business operation at least 30 minutes before.
So by 12, by actually 1 .30, they have closed the shutters.
They are doing cleaning.
Anyone who is eating inside, they should be getting their back out of the building.
All these will be conditions and if the test officer goes again, then he has substance to enforce.
At the moment, what crime have they committed by doing things without anything in place?
Thank you very much. That's a very thorough answer. If you could turn your mic off for me.
Yes, thank you.
Just my second question before I invite other members to participate.
On page 104 in the supplementary agenda, it talks about the two test purchases failed.
So the crux of your point is give us, extend the licence and that will be enforceable,
but there's been clear examples of the applicant hasn't been a good steward of their current licence.
So I wanted to very briefly speak about what steps you're taking to ensure,
because there's one on the, the 9th of August was a test purchase.
Yeah, I'll let Jonathan rephrase that.
Sorry, I think just to clarify, there is no licence at the moment because the premises doesn't have one and they can't carry out late night refreshment.
Effectively what Councillor Abdu, I think, is trying to say is you don't have a licence, so the law doesn't in fact permit you, or your client rather, to sell hot food or hot drink after 2300.
He has done that on two occasions that we know of. What faith therefore can this committee have?
because to turn around and say that there is a licence that can be enforced if you have it,
the law can already be enforced.
So what's going to be different if your client gets the licence?
What Jonathan said, so yeah, that's it.
So if you want to answer that would be really helpful, thank you.
If I get this right, what they can do to avoid this reoccurrence, correct?
If that's a summary of the question.
It is more about if your client can't keep to the fundamentals, which is to not operate
outside permitted hours, what faith can the committee have that if they grant your client
a licence that he will do anything in terms of complying with the conditions, et cetera,
when he hasn't even complied with the most basic requirement?
That's what the committee wants to know.
Yeah, so of course there is a training of staff there to abide by the conditions and
to make sure that the manager makes sure this particular condition is here and not to sell
anything beyond the authorised hours by the lancets is the key here.
So you see here, and I have been sharing with them all about this particular thing and to
honest, his promise is very sort about whatever has happened and he's ready to do anything
possible to make sure that that does not repeat itself and he's willing to take up any responsibility
that will come if for some reason that happens and I'm very sure they learnt their lesson
here.
Any other notices they can put, there is no set of food here this time, those are all
the other practical things they can do.
So that the customer can read and say close, there is nothing here from 1 .30.
Members?
Councillor Ali.
Thank you, chair.
I just want to really concentrate on the noise and nuisance.
People lodging outside and people talking loudly and shouting and impacting on residents.
and all the complaints, historical complaints have happened.
What in terms of, you know, what mitigation will you do?
I don't get a sense of an understanding of the severity of those complaints
and the impact it's having on people, the residents around the area.
I know you've said that maybe there are no residents on top of the promises, its offices,
but still noise travels and there is definitely been complaints
about this particular business, so I don't get a sense that there's any mitigation or
way of resolving those issues, or if the applicant even understands that it is a serious problem
and how the applicant would go forward if we were to grant him the licence, what conditions
are in place to solve that problem?
Yes, so, Councillor, the source of noise really, according to the objections here, is more
to do with the people gathering around that corridor, that vine court here.
Now in this particular premises being a restaurant, everything happens inside.
they are solid walls, so structural noise from people just dining and going away, who
would not really be expected to be material.
I know there is also a kitchen there, and there is a noise extraction unit which goes
to the back.
But attenuation measures which have been put inside the thing actually keeps the place
silent, and they didn't pick that up in their objection.
So, to answer your question, I will do discuss with my client to first of all undertake the
structural integrity of the building to see if there are some measures like insulation
that can be introduced to address such things, such concerns.
But at this stage here, looking at just eating, sitting and eating, there might not be much
noise but there are so many things that can come from inside.
So things like moving any rubbish in the night, that can be controlled because if we don't
allow, if you put a condition restricting the movements of things, cleaning of things
That's why we want to condition at least from 1 a .m. to 1 .30 so that they have at least
30 minutes to close that. They don't have a problem even if we can put a condition a
close one hour later by one o 'clock so that they can have that period to prepare and limit
the movement inside. By that time there is no any other person because when they are
washing plates, when they are moving the suspense, when they are doing all those things, that
Noise can also come from there.
So that's why we need to commission structural integrity of the walls of the building to
see that can actually avoid a transfer of noise beyond the envelope.
Deliveries, that should come in the morning from 7 in the morning to 10, that period there,
That is day hours.
So that we limit any deliveries and servicing issues beyond that.
Other than that, really, there should be a sign there saying nobody is allowed to stand
in front of you.
That is one of the descriptions when they are sourcing for a security officer to stand
at the door there to make sure that all these things happen.
So I don't know whether I answered your question.
Any other questions from you, Councillor?
No, Councillor Fulk?
Thank you, Chair.
A couple of questions.
First of all, can I ask probably the licence officer,
is there any other restaurant that opens quite late
on that particular area?
The list...
I suppose...
Apologies.
The list of the premises in that vicinity is quite large.
on page 96.
Thank you.
I can see that now.
Thank you for the clarification.
This question of the applicant now.
What is the sitting capacity of your restaurant?
That how many customers you can accommodate in the restaurant?
Okay.
I did not take count, you can actually cheque the CCTV here because Montas started as a
radio system, but if you ask that question, they are about to take average of say ten
tables there? Less than that. So between maybe eight and ten around there, and two people
sitting one there, one here. So of course you don't, like any other business,
goes up and down. So there is not always a full at one given time. So I was there
yesterday up to to make sure that they actually closed it by eleven o 'clock.
I only saw about five tables, four only covered by one person each and
family in one. So to answer your question, it could range from one person to ten people.
So that varies depending on the time they come in. If there is no chair to sit in.
Just to clarify, you mean from one table to ten tables? So you said there's ten tables,
just understanding.
So I'm not very sure of the number of the table, but it says they are less than that.
But I'm just giving a range of people who might be, because there are two people sitting.
So even if it's eight people, you find that one person sits there.
Those are like 16 people.
So maybe it's easier to ask the question, I think Councillor Frick wants to get to,
what's the max capacity for the venue or the place?
OK. Can you help me there please?
Yeah, so it's less than that, so nine tables.
Nine tables.
So on each table there's like a max where people can sit.
OK.
So there are different sizes of chairs and there are many tables there.
Some tables can sit between three and four, some tables can sit between two people, some
can sit in a corner one person.
So take average when it is in a full capacity, which is always at daytime, not really in
the middle of the night.
Could go between 25 maybe people who can be there.
But that is daytime between 9 to 11.
Mostly that's when there is more of a capacity.
But it's not always it.
The business has been struggling.
That's why they are looking for extra hours.
So I appreciate that.
But it's a simpler question, isn't it?
So you should know what the max capacity of your venue is.
So I appreciate it dips and it's ups and flows to it.
But it's a simple question.
What is the max that can be in that space?
25 25 people. Thank you very much
The last question for the time being do you have a refuse collection contract with anyone at the moment?
Yes, they have with their council these are the beans here that they are they can solve the issues
Thank you, thank you chair
Thank you very much. I've just got one question for the objectors.
I don't have any questions for licencing, but environmental health and police.
So I've listened to your presentation and a lot of your concerns are around Vine Corp.
But can you just clarify, has there been anything as far as either of you two are aware
about this premises, any concerns that have been found about this premises,
rather than just Vine Corp, which is obviously important.
And we've had member, we've had local resident representation, but
We need to focus on this one.
So has this premise ever come to light to either of you?
So environmental health maybe first?
Not at all.
Not to my knowledge, Mr. Chair.
OK, thank you.
So none.
It hasn't.
OK, the police?
Not in respect of crime and disorder,
but only for the previous licencing breaches.
I think if PC Wells can tell me from where I think what he means is from a crime and disorder perspective they're aware of the licencing breaches i .e. the test purchases but nothing else is that correct?
Yeah no crimes that we're aware of only the breaches of the licencing act sorry.
Okay that's really helpful thank you very much. Jonathan do you have any questions or clarification?
It would be quite useful to clarify.
Does your client understand what the cumulative impact zone is?
Can he explain it to the members, please?
I think members would like to hear that he understands it.
It's up to him if he chooses not to, but I think the members can, I think it might be
helpful for the members to hear from him what he understands obviously.
Can I ask you to put your mic on?
Apologies, we can't hear you.
I think you think I'm Mr Mamun.
Actually, no, I just managed.
He sent me because he can't come in today to speak with Mr Moses.
Just to confirm, you're not the applicant?
I'm not Mr Mamun, no.
It doesn't make strictly speaking any difference because of course the applicant is here being
represented by Mr. O 'Connie.
That's absolutely fine.
It's obviously not very helpful when Ms. Yasmin is told, as I understand it, that the applicant,
Mr. Al Mamoun is here.
And obviously when Miss Yasmin has announced those in attendance and specifically said that is slightly concerned
Okay, but the point is that no one bothered to correct
Who you were when Miss Yasmin said that you were here thinking you miss mr. Al and Al Mamoun
Can you please just confirm what your name is place sir and what your relationship is with the applicant?
Yeah, I'm just a staff mister. My name is M D Mia
is Mr Al Mamou.
He is not in London at the moment.
Thank you very much.
It is just worth correcting the record and the minutes.
Any final questions?
Councillor Lai.
I have a question for licenced citizens.
Just looking at page 97, looking at the different venues in the area and the different times,
some of them are operating until 1 .30 in the morning and one until 5 o 'clock in the morning.
Of course, there might be already impact and maybe noise already.
Why then did you think it wasn't you objecting to this licence, if there's already others
in the area with late licencing and early morning licencing?
When we make a representation, we have to look at this specific application.
So I didn't delve too much into the fact that it's in the CIZ, which we'll obviously add
to it, but the specific premise is, I've listed the failed test purchases, and the Vine call
has been mentioned.
So the link to Vinecore is access and egress.
If this licence gets a late permission,
the issues that you already have in the Vinecore area will then move over.
I think that's the picture the properties are trying to create.
The Vinecore already has issues. If this gets a licence, it will become the magnet
for the rest of the foot flow to become the new hub,
effectively to cause the nuisance.
Also just to clarify, Councillor, it's only the one venue, it's actually the Shell station
down the road, so they're going to be licenced because they'll be selling hot coffee to people
driving, it's not a restaurant as such.
Thank you.
Councillor Fruch.
Just a final question to the applicant, the agent.
Is there any particular reason why you're going to open till 5 in Ramadan?
Is there any particular reason?
So, Chair, that was withdrawn by the...
That was withdrawn, but that's...
No further questions, Chair. Thank you.
Councillor Ali, any further questions?
Right. Thank you very much for that.
We'll now move to concluding remarks.
The objectors have one minute each
and then a hand over to the applicant who's got a minute to conclude.
So, if I start with licencing, please.
Chair, thank you.
I would conclude, as we've just discovered,
that this person is not the applicant,
that is part of the problem to this application.
So when we visited the premises in August,
somebody called Mr. Arif was there,
someone who works there, just a manager.
So obviously all this was brought to his attention,
which we would have thought he would have brought
to the attention of the licence holder or the applicant.
And then now today you have someone who is not applicant
and again has sent somebody else on his behalf.
So for us the real question is who is this applicant,
this licence holder you're going to grant the licence to?
Because if you do grant it, you're going to get the same issue.
We won't know where he is.
Till now he still hasn't contacted the licence authority,
so we don't know who he is.
It could be anyone.
So therefore we have no confidence that if you grant this licence
that whoever is granted to will be able to uphold the licence and objectives
and therefore will not comply with any conditions that you put in the licence.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Can I now invite Environmental Health to make a
concluding remarks. Yeah, thank you chair. Chair members, thank you for hearing my
representation. In closing, I wish to emphasise that the licencing objective
of preventing public users is central to this application. The existing issues
at Vine Court are serious, long standing and well evidenced.
Standing this activity in this area until 3 a .m.
in the morning would in environmental protection
in our opinion would unreasonably
and unavoidably burden on, burden more local residents
or place more burden on the local residents.
We are, the protection of our residents will be most
remain paramount.
The evidence here demonstrate a clear risk
of worsening public users.
The proposal are disproportionate
for this sensitive location
and significantly it is a CIS zone.
We remain to petition our team respectfully
maintain our recommendation for refusal.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you very much.
And the final object to the police.
Thank you, Chair and members.
Just in conclusion,
and I think with respect to this application, our representation against it is twofold.
On the one hand, if this licence is granted until two or three in the morning, we do think
it will have a negative impact with respect to the crime and disorder and prevention of
public nuisance in the area on the balance of probabilities and obviously the things
that have been said here today.
On top of that, throughout the whole application process, the applicant has had an opportunity
to negotiate and speak and offer up enforceable and reasonable conditions as to how they intend
to promote the licence and objectives. They have failed to do that and we do not believe
that in the process of this committee hearing they have failed to convince us that they
are a responsible licence holder and that they will uphold the licence and objectives.
Thank you. Thank you very much. The applicant now has
an opportunity for concluded remarks. You've got up to one minute.
Thank you very much.
I would like to conclude that with those mitigation measures that we discussed here in place,
I believe that the applicant who sent me to represent him with one of his staff will be
able to abide by those conditions and also the council is willing to work with the council
to make sure that those conditions are not breached.
It is also an opportunity to give him a chance to see whether he can actually be able to
bring the premises under control and also probably bring others in the place.
So it is a test.
So I am requesting that a recommendation for approval should really be given so that the
and the business strive.
Thank you very much.
I thank everybody for their contributions today.
The subcommittee will now deliberate in private.
Democratic Services will write to you with our decision within five working days.
Thank you very much all for coming.
Can I now move on to extensions of positions deadline?
Simi to announce extensions.
Thank you, Chair.
Please can I ask the Chair and the subcommittee members to extend the following applications.
Landing Canary Wharf, first floor 12 Bank Street London E14. Amazing Grace 12
Bank Street London E14 for JB. Second home 68 to 80 Hanbury Street London E1
Brick Lane E1 49 Brick Lane London E1 6PU. I am Coffee 30 Fashion Street London
E16PX and Shell Oldford 445 Wick Lane London E32TB if they can all be extended to the 31st of March 2026.
Please, Chair.
Yep, agreed to the extension. Yep, okay, thank you everybody for your contributions. The meeting is now closed.