Agenda item

Ward CIA* SCZ**	Site Name & Address	Application Type	Licensing Reference No.
Bayswater None* Queensway and Bayswater **	Ma Dames,                58 Porchester Road,     W2 6ET	Temporary Event Notice	22/00354/LITENP
*Cumulative Impact Area ** Special Consideration Zone

 

WESTMINSTER CITY COUNCIL LICENSING SUB- COMMITTEE N0.3

(“The Committee”)

 

Thursday 27 January 2022

 

Membership:      Councillor Jim Glen (Chairman) Councillor Barbara Arzymanow     and Councillor Aicha Less

 

Officer Support: Legal Adviser:        Viviene Walker

                          Policy Officer:         Kerry Simpkin

                          Committee Officer: Sarah Craddock

                          Presenting Officer: Roxsana Haq

                         

Application for a Temporary Event Notice in respect of Ma Dames 58 Porchester Road London W2 6ET 22/00354/LITENP

 

                                   

                                           FULL DECISION

 

Premises

 

Ma Dames

58 Porchester Road

London W2 6ET

 

Premises User

 

Miss Jennifer Cassandri

 

Ward

 

Bayswater

 

Cumulative Impact Zone

 

None 

 

Special Consideration Zone

 

Queensway and Bayswater

 

The Committee has considered objections from Environmental Health Service and the Metropolitan Police Service to a Temporary Event Notice (“TEN”) which been given by Miss Jennifer Cassandri (“The Applicant”) in relation to an event taking place on 30^th January 2022 between the hours of 00:01 and 03:00 (“The Event”).

 

The Applicant is proposing to provide the sale of alcohol, the provision of regulated entertainment and late-night refreshment.

The Committee has considered the committee papers and the submission made by all the parties, both orally and in writing.  In reaching its decision the Committee has had regard to the relevant legislation, the Secretary of State’s Guidance (“The Guidance”) and the Authority’s Statement of Licensing Policy (“SLP”).

 

The Committee has decided, after taking into account all of the individual circumstances of this application, the prevention of public nuisance, crime and disorder and the protection of children from harm licensing objectives:

 

To issue a Counter Notice under section 105 of the Licensing Act 2003 for the event.  This notice means permission for the licensable activities requested in the Temporary Event Notice has not been approved.

 

 

                                SUBMISSIONS AND REASONS

 

Ms Roxsana Haq, the Presenting Officer, outlined the application.

 

Ms Soraya Zidoun on behalf of the Applicant stated that this was an application to hold a 40^th birthday party for the wife of a regular client at the Premises.  She highlighted that it would be a private event held for friends and family and that they had held events for this particular client in the past with no issues occurring.  She explained that they would employ four to six SIAs who will help control the departure of the customers to prevent noise nuisance to residents.  She emphasised that this was not a ticketed event.  She further stated that the Premises had not accepted any private bookings since the 15 December 2021, to avoid trouble over the Christmas period and that the bills were now piling up which needed to be paid.  She mentioned that the Premises wished to convert into a comedy club but wanted to also keep their late-night licence to hold events for their regular customers only. 

 

Ms Zidoun explained that Ms Cassandra (the Applicant) was unable to be present at the hearing today as she had to travel to France to bury her father. She confirmed that she would be back in the UK by the date of the private event. She also confirmed, when questioned by the Sub-Committee that the Premises had been open as per their Premises Licence on Thursday, Friday and Saturday evenings to the general public.

 

Ms Zidoun advised that she was the Events Manager for the Premises and that to prevent nuisance at the Premises they requested clients provide their passport or driving licence and there is a guest list.  She emphasised that the client who had booked the event on Sunday was a regular customer who had previously held events at the Premises with no issues or cause for concern for the Premises or residents.

 

In response to questions from the Sub-Committee, Ms Zidoun confirmed that they had received complaints regarding a couple of events that had been held at the Premises as it had been a struggle to get everyone to leave the Premises quietly.  She confirmed that the Police had been called and eventually everyone had stopped making a noise and left the Premises.  She explained that the Premises had introduced a new policy which stated that they would not hold events to new customers and that their preference was to hold birthday parties/end of school year parties for under 18s (where there would be no alcohol and parents were present) and which would finish at midnight.  She confirmed that nine out of ten enquires for bookings were refused as they were very careful on who held events in their Premises because of their previous bad experiences.  She again emphasised that there would be no anti-social behaviour on Sunday as the event was being hosted by a regular customer and was by invitation only.  There would be security present who would control the guests leaving at the end of the night.  She explained that guests would be allowed to leave in groups of 5 to avoid causing noise nuisance to the residents.  Ms Zidoun alleged that her clientele had received threats from residents.

 

Ms Zidoun stated that that Environmental Health Service had been unable to visit the Premises to check the noise limiter (there had been 14 complaints regarding noise transference trough the party walls) because the Applicant had been tending to her father who was very ill and who lived in France.  She added that as the Premises had no events booked it had not been an emergency.  She advised that the Applicant would be back in the UK on Friday and a visit could be arranged before the event on Sunday.

 

Mr Watson, representing the Environment Health Service (EHS), stated that previously EHS had not objected to any temporary event notices (TENS) from these Premises.  However, complaints had been received by residents, there was concern regarding the noise transference through the party walls and that the noise limiter and party walls had not been inspected by EHS (even though requests for a visit to the Premises had been requested by EHS).  He stated that the last TENS event held at the Premises had been a 30^th birthday party (not an event from a promotor) and that complaints had still been received regarding noise nuisance on the street and noise transference through the party walls.  Mr Watson referred to the plans of the Premises and advised that previously there had been a false wall erected to prevent noise transfer to resident’s premises.

 

In response to questions from the Sub-Committee, Mr Watson advised that the noise limiter should be under management control and that the noise limiter should not form part of the necessary amplification.  He explained that another concern was that visiting DJs could potentially bring their own equipment and not route it through the noise limiter.

 

Mr Watson called Alex Juon, City Inspector, as a witness. 

 

Mr Juon stated that a number of complaints had been received about the operation of these Premises since the 19 July 2021, which was when nightclubs had been allowed to re-open again following the pandemic lockdown.  He advised that complaints had been received by numerous people including from the Ward Councillors, the Police, local residents and council officers. He explained that photographs and video evidence had been received illustrating ASB activity outside of the Premises as well as in the immediate surrounding residential area of Celbridge Mew (inhalation of nitrous oxide) and on Westbourne Park Road.

 

Mr Juon stated that these complaints were received when TENs had been granted to the Premises and he had been informed that residents were now spending weekends away because of their concern around noise nuisance and for fear of disturbance.  He added that he had written personally to Miss Cassandri in December 2021, suggesting three alternative dates to visit the Premises.  However, no date had been secured to visit the venue.  He further advised that there had been a meeting held on the 5 November 2021, with the Applicant who reassured him that she was putting measures in place to improve the operation of the Premises, including a dispersal plan, however, since then he had seen videos that suggested these measures had been ineffective, and no dispersal plan had been sent to the Council.  He confirmed that since the last event held under a TEN at the Premises no complaints had been received from residents.

 

In response to questions from the Sub-Committee, Mr Juon advised that the noise limiter and party walls needed to be inspected before any further TENs were granted to the Premises.  He further added that there was also the ongoing issue of people creating noise nuisance leaving the Premises especially in Westbourne Park Road as the Premises still did not have a dispersal plan.

 

PC Reaz Guerra, representing the Metropolitan Police Service, stated that there had been nine TENS in 2021 (four birthday parties and five externally promoted events).  He advised that from his perspective it did not make much difference whether the event was a promoted event or a birthday party as the concerns raised were particularly related to the later hours when people were dispersed from the Premises.  He stated that the Applicant had not provided any information regarding additional controls that had been put place to prevent anti-social behaviour and disturbance to residents.  He stated that he was concerned that the Applicant was out of the country and might not be present at the event scheduled to be held this Sunday.

 

PC Reaz Guerra called PC Andy Burgin as a witness. 

 

PC Burgin stated that he had been liaising with the community regarding the Premises for a few months and advised that he had received an extensive list of complaints about the Premises, all occurring after 01.30am.  The complaints included:

·       loud conversations and partying on Westbourne Park Road.

·       the playing of loud music and the revving of car engines.

·       smoking nitrous oxides or drug taking.

·       shouting, drinking, vomit in the surrounding roads

·       urination and defecation in the mews behind the club.

·       people having sex in the mews behind the club.

 

PC Burgin advised that residents were distraught and were leaving their homes whilst events were taking place.  He confirmed that it was clear from the videos that he had viewed that the ASB activities (mentioned above) were being caused by customers from attending the nightclub.  He strongly advised the Sub-Committee that this was not normal behaviour from people leaving a nightclub and that it their behaviour was unacceptable in such a residential area.  He stated that the location was not fit for purpose.  In response to questions from the Sub-Committee, he advised that the Premises already had an extensive set of conditions on its Premises Licence to promote the Licensing Objectives which if followed would prevent ASB occurring in the surrounding residential area.  However, in any event, the Applicant did not seem able to ensure that the conditions already on the licence were enforced and therefore, he was still of the view that the licensing objectives would be undermined. 

 

Conclusion

 

The Committee agreed with the concerns raised by the Environmental Health Service and the Police that they did not have sufficient reassurance that the application would promote the licensing objectives.  Indeed, having heard the evidence as stated above, the Committee decided that allowing the Temporary Event Notice would undermine the prevention of crime and disorder and prevention of public nuisance licensing objectives and it determined to issue a counter notice under section 105 of the Licensing Act 2003.

 

This is the full decision reached by the Licensing Sub-Committee

This Decision takes immediate effect.

 

Licensing Sub-Commission

27 January 2022