Agenda item

To consider the attached report for a new adult gaming licence.

The three Councillors that presided over this application were Councillors S Neville (Chairman), A Lion and D Stocker.

 

The Chairman introduced the Members and Officers present and outlined the procedure that would be followed for the determination of the application.

 

In attendance were the applicant S Hawkins the applicant’s representative D Miller and the objector J Walker.

 

 

(a)        Application before the Sub-Committee

 

The Licensing Officer, H Ibrahim, informed the Sub-Committee that an application had been made by Stephen Hawkins, Essex Leisure for a new Adult Gaming Centre Licence at 65 The Broadway, Loughton, IG10 3SP.

 

The opening hours of the premises would be:

                        Monday to Friday        10:00 to 22:00,

                        Saturday                     10:00 to 20:00

                        Sunday                       10:00 to 18:00

 

The application was received by the Licensing Authority on the 1 December 2020.

All Responsible Authorities had been notified and it had been properly advertised at the premises and in a local newspaper, all residences and businesses within a 150 metre radius of the premises were individually consulted.

The authority had received one representation from Loughton Town Council, one representation from Loughton Residents Association Plans Group and one representation from a local resident The objections related to protection of children and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited by gambling.

A response was received from Essex Trading Standards who had no objection.

When considering an application for a licence the licensing authority musthave regard to steps that were appropriate to promote the licensing objectives.

(a)  Preventing gambling from being a source of crime or disorder, being associated with crime or disorder or being used to support crime;

(b)  Ensuring that gambling was conducted in a fair and open way;

(c)   Protecting children and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited by gambling.

It must also have regard to the its Gambling Act 2005, the Licensing Authority’s ownStatement of Licensing Policy and guidance issued by the Gambling Commission and its Code of Practice.

 

(b)       Presentation of the Application

 

Mr Miller a represented the British Amusement Catering Trade Association (BACTA) and presented the application for Mr Hawkins who was a member of BACTA. Mr Miller advised that as a member of BACTA social responsibility and training was paramount. He advised that all staff would be trained, there would be a minimum of two members of staff on site at all times, there was cctv, and there was no visibility of the gaming machines from the door or outside the building. Only adults would be allowed on the premises and the company operated the challenge 25 scheme. Anyone who appeared to under the age of 25 would be asked for specific proof of identity and there would be no admittance if this could not be provided, a log had to be maintained for all attempted entries and the log was a legal requirement which formed part of the annual submission to the gambling commission. No children would be allowed on premises

Mr Hawkins added that the BACTA ran a national self exclusion policy and if anyone had a gambling problem they could self-exclude, this exclusion would extend across all gambling centre in the area. All members of staff would be trained to recognise signs of gambling harm, and individuals could be signposted to relevant organisations for help and support.

 

 

(c)        Questions for the Applicant from the Sub-Committee

 

The Sub-Committee asked if the applicant was aware of the proximity of the colleges and schools. Mr Miller advised that this had been taken account in the risk assessment and there would be additional checks through a mystery shopping exercise.

 

The Sub Committee wanted confirmation that vulnerable people would not be allowed access the premises, this was confirmed.

 

(d)       Questions for the Applicant from the Objector

 

J Walker asked for clarity on when the age verification process would happen, how the outside of the premises would be made unattractive to children, if the gaming machines were visible, if there were any time limits on playing the gaming machines and if the premises had CCTV.

Mr Miller advised that the premises had a buzzer entry system, controlled from a central till area with good visibility of the outside of the premise. No entry would be allowed to children, and the buzzer system would allow the age check to happen as people entered the premises. The premises would remove all the current child friendly images on the premises to ensure that it was not attractive to children, and no gaming machines could be seen from outside or from the door of the premises. The business had been designed so that on entry all that could be seen was the front desk, the gaming machines would be in the middle and back of the premises.

Staff received training and skills in social responsibility, they would make an interaction with anyone who was exhibiting behaviours that may indicate a gambling problem, the interventions would be logged. Mr Miller detailed the referral system to GamCare the national gambling helpline. There would be CCTV inside and outside the premises, recordings would be kept for 28 days.

 

(e)        Presentation from the Objector

 

J Walker suggested that this was an inappropriate location for the adult gambling centre, The Broadway had a large number of children and schools and this would be a risk especially for New City College students and vulnerable people in the area.

She advised that the risk could be mitigated through door supervision, and suggested that two members of staff on site may not be enough.

 

(f)        Questions for the Objector from the Applicant

 

 

Mr Hawkins advised that when the premises was busy he envisaged 12 customers to be on the premises. He stated that two members of staff would be more than able to control these numbers.  The premises had 40 machines but these would never all be played together.

 

(g)       Closing Statement from the Objector.

 

The objector had nothing further to add.

 

(h)       Closing Statement from the Applicant

 

The applicant had nothing further to add.

 

(i)         Consideration of the Application by the Sub-Committee

 

 

The Legal Advisor, R Fererri, advised the committee and applicant that there we were no default conditions in relation to adult gaming centre and asked for clarity regarding section 15a of the application.  Mr Hawkins confirmed that 15a of the application should read ‘no’.

 

The Chairman advised that the Sub-Committee would go into private deliberations to consider the application. During their deliberations the Sub-Committee received no further advice from the Legal Officer present.

 

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the application for a premises licence in respect of a new Adult Gaming Centre Licence at Slots O Luck of 65 The Broadway, Debden, Loughton, Essex IG10 3SP

Be Granted to  Stephen Robert Hawkins trading as Essex Leisure, Essex House, 21 Eastways, Witham, Essex CM8 3YQ, operating licence number  000-000778-N-101005-008

 

The following conditions have been attached to the premises licence under section 169(1)(a) of the Gambling Act 2005.

 

• The premises must not open on Christmas Day, namely the period of 00.01hours on 25 December until 00.00 on 26 December.
• Reason:  this condition is set out in clause 9.18 of the Gambling Commission Guidance to Licensing Authorities 5^th addition (September 2015) and in Section183 of the Gambling Act 2005.

 

The licensing authority did receive representations in relation to the application.

Representations

(1)       Page 88 of the Agenda from Debra Paris, Planning and Licensing Committee of Loughton Town Council. The objections mainly relate to the 4 objectives contained in the Licensing Act 2003; the number of gambling establishments; the area being a residential area with young families ,social housing and vulnerable people; entry age, prevention of crime and disorder, the closure of the front door and the suggested conditions relating to door supervisor, CCTV and visibility of gaming machines.

 

(2)       Pages 89 and 90 of the Agenda from Judith Walker for the Loughton Residents Association Plans Group. No floor plan, the area being awash with children, teenagers, young adults, students, vulnerable people / adults, too many gambling establishments, residential area, leading to more crime and antisocial behaviour and suggested conditions relating to door supervisor, CCTV and visibility of gaming machines.

 

(3)     Page 90- from Mrs Garwood. Not a good idea, problems with drugs, drink, teenage fights, she and her friends did not go out after dark as very intimidating, spending money on ridiculous gambling.

 

 

Licensing Authority’s Response

 

This Licensing Sub Committee have noted all of the representations made together with their suggested conditions and thank those who attended and shall now outline the reasons for its decision.

 

In determining applications, a licensing authority should not take into consideration matters that were not related to the Gambling Act and its Guidance and therefore objections based on other legislation have been disregarded when reaching our decision.

 

Conditions on premises licences should relate to gambling. Conditions imposed must be proportionate to the circumstances which they were seeking to address and must be reasonable. Decisions on conditions must be on a case-by-case basis and in the context of the principles of Section 153 of the Act. Mandatory conditions were set with intention that no further regulation in relation to that matter is required.

 

Moral and ethical objectives to gambling were not a valid reason to reject an application. The decision of a licensing authority cannot be based on a dislike for gambling or general notion that it is undesirable to allow gambling premises in an area.

 

Licensing authorities should also not turn down applications for a premises licence where relevant objectives could be dealt with by conditions.

 

Section 153 of the Act makes it clear that number of establish establishments cannot be taken into account when determining an application for a premises licence.

 

In relation to protecting children and other vulnerable persons from being harm or exploited by gambling, the application had stated that there would be a minimum of two staff on the premises, training would be given to all staff and CCTV available inside and outside of the premises.

 

The aim is to permit the use of premises for gambling and therefore conditions should not be attached that limit their use except where it is necessary in accordance with the gambling objectives under the Gambling Act 2005, the Gambling Commission’s code of practice and the Gambling Act Guidance or the licensing authority’s own statement of policy.

 

An appeal may be brought against the grant of the application, or the imposition or exclusion of the conditions referred to above by either the applicant, or any person who made representations in relation to the application. An appeal must be instituted:

 

·        in the magistrates’ court for a local justice area in which the premises were wholly or partly situated;

·        by notice of appeal given to the designatedofficer;

·        within 21 days beginning with the date of receipt of this notice ofgrant.