Now contains confirmation of the withdrawal of Licensing Out of Hours representation.

The Hearing Panel considered a report from the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing concerning an application for a new Gambling Premises Licence at the above location. The Hearing Panel considered the written representations within the papers and the oral representations of the parties who attended the hearing, as well as the relevant legislation.

The applicant’s counsel addressed the Hearing Panel. They began by addressing the main issues regarding the application. Firstly, the representation from Licensing Out of Hours (LOOH). The applicant’s counsel noted there had been concerns over the presentation of the Premises, staff to customer ratios, and inadequate signage displayed at other stores. Each of those concerns had been addressed and subsequently, LOOH withdrew their representation on the date of the previous hearing, 21 February 2025.

In relation to crime and disorder, the primary source of information was noted as being the Police. There had been no representation received from Greater Manchester Police (GMP). Pre-application discussions had taken place with GMP regarding the proposed conditions and they were satisfied with the proposals. GMP were particularly pleased to see Condition 12 which stated:

“For 6 months from the date the premises is open to the public, the date to be confirmed in writing to the Licensing Authority, a SIA licensed door supervisor shall be on duty from 22:00 until 06:00 the following morning. Following the initial 6-month period, the requirement for door staff shall be risk assessed and cognisance taken of police advice.”

The applicant’s counsel noted that there had been failures of staff in their Stockport store. Those failings had been investigated by the Gambling Commission who subsequently fined the applicant for that. The Gambling Commission, in their findings, did note that the applicant had and continued to have sufficient policies and procedures in place. Following the imposition of the fine, staff were retrained, not just at the Stockport premises but throughout the whole estate. The Gambling Act 2005 requires the Licence holder to be responsible for staff actions and the Gambling Commission had made that distinction clear. The applicant’s counsel submitted that it was irrational and wrong to extrapolate from this fine that the applicant could not be trusted. The applicant, under different names, had been operating since the 1980’s and had over 200 stores, with this imposing of a fine of the Gambling Commission an isolated incident.

The applicant had responded to Public Health’s late submission on 24 March 2025. Substantial investigations had taken place between the original hearing date and the submission of the applicant’s response. The applicant noted that they had reported 25 self-exclusions in that timeframe, more than three times that of their closest national competitor. In terms of the complainant, there were no signs of a need for staff to interact with them based on the list provided by the Gambling Commission of behaviours staff should be aware of.

The applicant’s counsel, in relation to the protection of children and other vulnerable persons, accepted that any gambling Premises carries the risk  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.