Agenda item

Review of the premises licences for:

Madame JoJo’s, 8-10 Brewer Street, W1

14/09263/LIREVX

An application had been made by the Metropolitan Police Service to review the premises licences for Madame JoJo's and Escape Nightclub under Section 53A(1)(b) of the Licensing Act 2003 (premises associated with serious crime or disorder).

The Committee after considering the report and the evidence presented at the hearing may take such interim steps as it considers necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives.  These steps are:

(a)       modification of the conditions of the premises licence (modify, delete or add conditions);

(b)       to exclude the sale by retail of alcohol from the scope of the licence;

(c)       to suspend the licence for a period not exceeding three months

(d)       to revoke the licence;

Decision (including reasons):

The Sub-Committee initially heard from Mr Rankin.  He stated that there had been a grievous assault perpetrated by employees from Madame JoJo’s and Escape Nightclub on Friday 24 October 2014 at approximately 00:35 hours.  There had been a series of failings which showed a complete disregard for the licensing objectives and the serious incident had been created purely by the employees themselves.  Mr Rankin described the attack (as detailed below).  He emphasised that the incident was so serious that it did not matter  how good the new management strategy was or how  the new DPS was, the Police were seeking revocation of the licence to send a clear message to the West End that this behaviour would not be tolerated.

Sergeant Partridge and PC Guerra took Members through the CCTV footage of the incident.  This included the incidents recorded on CCTV outside Madame JoJo’s and also CCTV from inside the venue directed towards the street.  The footage from the external camera included the discussion between a member of security from Escape and a Somali male escalating to the point where the male is head-butted and then pinned against the wall by the security manager of Madame JoJo’s only to be punched a number of times by a man the Police believed to be Madame JoJo’s taxi operator.  When the Somali male returned with a group of males seen throwing glass bottles towards Madame JoJo’s door, the indoor camera showed security staff producing baseball bats wrapped in bin liners.  The Somali male was attacked again by security staff, including with a baseball bat by the man believed to be the taxi operator.  The Police were of the view that the footage clearly demonstrated that the security manager had authorised the use of the baseball bats.  Mr Rankin commented that the man described as the taxi operator clearly knew where the baseball bats were kept, was shown to have a close association with staff at the premises and took part in the attack itself.  One man had been injured by a glass bottle thrown by the group of males and there had been no first aid box at the premises to treat his injury.  This had to be obtained from another premises and a customer had cleaned up the injured man.  The injured man was an innocent passer-by and had nothing to do with the club or the Somali male.

Sergeant Partridge advised that the manager on duty, Mr Zorick, had pointed to where the baseball bats were kept and thumbs up signs had been used between the security staff, taxi driver and night manager to acknowledge that they knew where the baseball bats were kept on the premises.  After the incident had taken place the baseball bats were replaced and the broken baseball bat was initially hidden .  The Police had also had particular concerns that they had not been called initially when the incident arose and noted that the night manager on duty appeared to have been totally apathetic about the serious assault that was taking place. He did eventually call the police but not until 12.40 am, over 1 hour after the initial assault occurred. Sergeant Partridge strongly advised that what had happened was completely outrageous and that other operators in Brewer Street had been shocked by the incident.  He emphasised that the revocation of the licence was the only clear way to ensure such a serious incident did not happen again in the West End.

Mr Kolvin stated that he did not dispute the Police interpretation of the CCTV although he did make the point that the man Police believed to be the taxi operator was not a member of staff of Madame JoJo’s or Escape.  His client, Ms Louise Tkaczyk the DPS, was appalled by the incident and did not condone any of the events, including the use of baseball bats.  Ms Tkaczyk also wished to apologise for the incident taking place.  Ms Tkaczyk had run Madame JoJo’s for 13 years and Escape for 8 years and nothing like this had happened before.  The Committee would have read how warm and friendly the premises was received by the 140,000 people who visited the premises each year.  Neither premises attracted trouble makers and were not ‘on the radar’ for the Police as causing serious crime and disorder.  Ms Tkaczyk had not been well for much of 2014 and had installed Mr Paajoe Gaskin, Mr Steven Tkaczyk, the DPS’ father and Mr Bojan Zorick as managers.  Ms Tkaczyk had felt very let down by Mr Zorick.  She had shut both venues voluntarily at the request of the Police and had co-operated with the Police in terms of evidence gathering, including providing the CCTV footage.  Since the closure of the premises Ms Tkaczyk had worked extremely hard on the action place, management strategy, employing a DPS and training all her staff to ensure the premises would be managed properly in the future. 

Mr Kolvin introduced Kerry Chapman to the Committee who Ms Tkaczyk had employed to take over as DPS and manage the premises.  Mr Kolvin went through Ms Chapman’s very impressive CV which clearly showed that Ms Chapman had been working in the business for over 18 years, was very successful and well respected by the industry and Police.   Ms Chapman advised how the staff had been re-trained, that a new head doorman had been employed personally by her, that she had a strong documented style of management for both staff and the owners and that she would have complete control over the hiring and firing of staff as it was her reputation on the line.  She confirmed that she was confident that she could successfully manage theses premises as DPS.

Mr Kolvin addressed the Sub-Committee on his client’s action plan.  Firstly Mr Zorick, the manager on duty, had been dismissed for gross misconduct.  Secondly, the door team had been dismissed and thirdly they had been replaced by TSS Security, an experienced company which operated a number of premises in the immediate area which would hopefully get the premises working together to deal with the external environmental problem between the door staff and street gangs.  Fourthly there would be two door supervisors at each venue during operating hours together with the introduction of female door staff which had shown to reduce the potential for conflict.  Fifthly, door staff would wear body cams provided by TSS which could record conversation. Step six. Any assault at the premises would be reported to the Police immediately.  Step seven.  Both Madame JoJo’s and Escape Nightclub were willing to become members of the Safer West End project.  Step eight. All managers and staff had received training with Abacus Training in the legitimate use of force, crime scene preservation, conflict management and incident report writing.  Step nine.  Ms Chapman had been employed as DPS.  Ms Tkaczyk had recognised that due to her illness she must step down as the role required someone who was able to work full time at the premises.  Step ten.  Ms Chapman would be employed on a full-time basis.  Step eleven.  There would be a named, responsible person in charge when the Ms Chapman was off and on leave.  Step twelve. Ms Tkaczyk had shut both venues voluntarily at the request of the Police, had co-operated with the Police in terms of evidence gathering, including providing the CCTV footage and had worked hard on implementing her action place, management strategy, employing a new DPS and training all her staff.

In conclusion, Mr Kolvin advised that a dedicated taxi company had been employed and a designated smoking area and queuing area would be arranged outside of the venues.  CCTV and flood lighting had also been installed to capture the whole of Brewer Street and all staff knew the location of the First Aid kits on the premises.

Mr Tkaczyk, the owner’s father, had left the business.  Mr Kolvin emphasised that this one incident should not undo all the good work built up over the years by the premises.  Ms Tkaczyk had done everything possible to ensure that such an incident would not happen again and hoped that the CCTV would bring the Safer West End Group some peace of mind.  He advised that Ms Tkaczyk was willing to give Mr White a direct telephone line to Ms Chapman.

The Sub-Committee referred to the possibility of drug/street gangs operating in the area.  Sergeant Partridge confirmed that there was an issue with drug/street gangs and that when the police were called the gangs disappeared and reappeared when they had gone.  He advised that the venues were working with the Police to try and deal with the gangs.  The Sub-Committee referred to page 333 of the report where it details an incident occurring against a manager at the premises.  Mr Kolvin gave brief details of the incident and confirmed that the Police had not pursued the incident.

Environmental Health advised that they supported the Metropolitan Police and that the licensing objectives as well as the Health and Safety regulations had been breached at the premises.

Mr White, a resident and member of the Safer Soho Panel expressed concerns about how the premises had been managed and sought for the licence to be revoked.  He was supported by Councillor Paul Church and his neighbours.  Mr White advised that drug dealing and gangs had disappeared from the area after the Police’s action last year but the chaotic nature and noise from customers and illegally parked taxis outside of Madame JoJo’s had continued. Since the closure of the two premises residents had been able to sleep as there had been no crowd noise and no bottle collections taking place at 3am.  Mr White firmly believed that all the problems occurring at Madame JoJo’s had come from weak management and weak ownership and ownership came first and management followed.  He also added that Madam JoJo’s had declined three times an invitation to join Safer Soho Panel.  Mr White concluded by stating that the new management plan was very impressive but it was fatally flawed because the same ownership remained of the two premises.

Mr Thomas, the solicitor acting for the freeholder, Soho Estates, referred to page 530 of the report which contained the representation from Soho Estates, the Landlord of the two premises. He advised that Soho Estates had serious concerns about the management and operation of the two premises and in their opinion there had been no real change or demonstration that the operation of the premises would change as the ownership remained the same.  Soho Estates supported the Police in calling for the revocation of the licence.

In response to the representations made by Mr White and Mr Thomas, Mr Kolvin advised that there had been no noise complaints regarding the premises.  Both premises were now members of the Safer West End Group and Health and Safety policies were in place in the premises.  Mr Kolvin advised that Soho Estates wanted his client to leave the premises but she had a legal right to occupy and manage these premises.  It was unavoidable that Ms Tkaczyk could not attend the hearing due to her ill health.  He explained that if Ms Chapman ceased to become DPS the police would be informed and that the police would be given the opportunity to scrutinise the credentials of any potential new DPS.

In conclusion, Mr Rankin advised that no premises could be managed in this way and the evidence presented at the hearing along with the video footage spoke for itself. The incident was so serious that the Police were seeking revocation of the licence. 

The Sub-Committee, having carefully considered all the evidence, decided it was necessary to revoke the premises licences for Madame JoJo’s and Escape Nightclub.   Members had noted that serious assaults with injury had taken place in the early hours of 24 October.  The DPS, Ms Tkaczyk, had not been present at the premises on that evening and had indeed not been present at the premises for some time.  She had put in place alternative arrangements for management supervision.  On the evening concerned it had appeared to the Sub-Committee from the CCTV evidence that those connected with the premises were prepared for trouble.  Baseball bats had been kept on an overhead shelf and when the incidents took place it appeared to be an organised assault on the Somali male concerned.  The Police were not called initially and it was not clear whether they would have been had an innocent individual not been injured.  There had been grossly inadequate first aid available to the individual from Madame JoJo’s and appropriate first aid had to be sought from an adjacent premises.  Environmental Health, Soho Estates and Mr White all supported the Police on the revocation of the licence to send a clear message to the premises n Soho that this type of incident would not be tolerated. In conclusion the Sub-Committee felt that the incident that had occurred was extremely serious and that the Licensee’s new management action plan, new management strategy and the employment of the new DPS  were not sufficient to address the gravity of this serious breach and the only appropriate action was to revoke the licence.