Now contains additional information submitted by GMP.

The Hearing Panel considered a report from the Head of Planning, Building Control and Licensing.  The Hearing Panel also considered the written papers of the parties submitted and the oral representations of the parties who attended as well as the relevant legislation.

The Greater Manchester Police (GMP) representative addressed the Hearing Panel and stated that the premises had their current licence since 2005. The PLH was Mr Andrew Mitchell and the premises had a newly appointed DPS following the incident leading to the review. The incident was a violent disturbance on Glendower Drive, outside The Vine pub. A firearm was discharged, a car was driven towards people and knives were used in the incident. During the events, 3 males left the premises armed with pool cues and a member of staff followed them to retrieve the pool cues. Meanwhile, the CCTV system behind the bar was removed. No explanation has been given to GMP on how, or why this happened or who removed the system. This is a serious concern to GMP.

Chris Grunert, the representative for The Vine addressed the Hearing Panel and apologised for Mr Mitchell’s absence, stating that he had a holiday booked prior to the hearing and was away. Mr Mitchell’s proxy was available to answer any operational question, should there be any need. Providing known details of the incident, the representative stated that the previous DPS, Mr Kevin Upton, was on the premises with his sister when the disturbance occurred. Mr Upton left to go to a cash and carry and returned at approximately 2:15pm to find a 4x4 blocking the car park and males arguing on site. Mr Upton checked the inside of the premises and made the decision to close the pub. Prior to this, 3 males had been on the premises, had been served with drinks and then left with pool cues. Mr Upton’s sister then left the premises to retrieve the pool cues and at was at this point that the CCTV system was taken. Mr Mitchell and GMP both concur that no violence occurred within The Vine during the incident. There were 30+ patrons on the premises at the time and there was no explanation of how the CCTV system was removed. The representative agreed that it was disturbing that this happened, stating that Mr Upton either doesn’t know or was hiding something. Either way, the representative stated that this was not satisfactory and confirmed that this informed the decision to remove Mr Upton from his position with no intention of him returning to his previous post. If Mr Upton had been intimidating into hiding information, he had been given opportunities to inform the PLH and GMP. Regarding ongoing operations at The Vine, the representative confirmed that the premises wished to continue trading with the updated CCTV system (images provided showed a locked area containing a locked box housing the system) and confirmed that this would also back up to an offsite “internet cloud.” Furthermore, Mr Mitchell as the PLH does not condone any code of silence and has always assisted GMP and, with the removal of Mr Upton, the updated CCTV system and lock up in place and a period of calm following the Interim Steps suspension decision, hoped that the premises could now continue trading.

In responding to questions from the Hearing Panel, the representative stated that the CCTV removal could only have been advantageous to someone up to no good and involved in the incident, that the call to the police was not made by Mr Upton and confirmed that only management staff would have access to the new CCTV system and lock up.

In summing up, the representative for The Vine stated that they were grateful to GMP for working with the premises.

GMP summed up by stating that they were in agreement with the new operations at The Vine and requested that the Hearing Panel took this into consideration.

In their deliberations, the Hearing Panel considered the serious nature of the incident involving serious violence but noted that the premises had made amendments to their CCTV in that it would now not be able to be removed, plus the system was now backed up online. Furthermore, the Hearing Panel noted that the previous DPS had been removed and a new member swiftly brought in as a replacement. The Hearing Panel also took note of GMP’s comments regarding their agreement with the new operations.

Decision

To amend the licence conditions by amending Annex 3, condition 1 to the following:

g.  The hard disk upon which data/images are stored from the premises' CCTV system shall be stored in a secure manner and accessible by key ( physical, electronic or combination code ) only.

h. The CCTV system shall, subject to the premises' internet connection, have offsite storage via the cloud.

Interim Steps Review

The Hearing Panel invited both parties to present their views on the Interim Steps and measures that they felt should be taken.

The representative for The Vine stated that logic suggested that the suspension was no longer necessary, due to the Hearing Panel now being satisfied with the updated operations and requested that the suspension be lifted.

GMP agreed that the suspension was no longer necessary.

In their deliberations, the Hearing Panel considered that the suspension put in place at the Interim Steps hearing was no longer necessary as they were satisfied that the updated conditions would address the previous concern over the CCTV system and the management of this.

Interim Steps Decision

To remove the Interim Steps decision and lift the suspension on the licence.