Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive any declarations of interest from Members.

There were no declarations of interest received.

Proposal:     Application for a Personal Licence

Applicant:    Mr Harry Elliot Frampton

NOTICE OF DECISION

The Licensing Sub-Committee of West Berkshire Council met on Monday 25 February 2013 and resolved to approve Application 13/00235/LIA in respect of a Personal Licence in the name of Harry Elliot Frampton, subject to a number of conditions which are set out below.

In coming to their decision, the Sub-Committee had regard to the following licensing objective:

1.                 The prevention of crime and disorder.

They also considered the Department of Culture, Media and Sport Guidance on the Licensing Act 2003 and West Berkshire Council’s licensing policy.

The Sub-Committee heard representations made by:

1.                  The Applicant: Harry Frampton

2.                  The Applicant’s supporter: Nick Roffe, Mr Frampton’s employer

3.                  The Objector: Mike King, Thames Valley Police

Having taken those representations into account, the Licensing Sub-Committee RESOLVED that the Application be granted. 

Reason:

In all of the circumstances, the Sub-Committee did not consider it to be necessary to reject the Application in order to promote the crime prevention and disorder objective.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Emilia Matheou (Licensing Officer, West Berkshire Council), Mr Harry Frampton (Applicant), Mr Nick Roffe (employer and supporter) and Mr Mike King (Licensing Officer for Thames Valley Police) addressed the Sub-Committee on this application.

Ms Matheou, in addressing the Sub-Committee, raised the following points.

Mr Harry Elliot Frampton of 2 Pound Lane Cottages, Bath Road, Halfway, Newbury, Berkshire RG20 8NT submitted an application on 31 January 2013 to West Berkshire Council Licensing for a personal licence to be granted under section 117 of the Licensing Act.

When submitting the application Mr Frampton provided a basic disclosure of convictions dated 29 January 2013 and completed a self declaration disclosing an unspent conviction for driving a motor vehicle with excess alcohol contrary to S(4)(5) of the Road Traffic Act 1988.  The matter was heard on 05 December 2012 at Berkshire Magistrates Court and was disposed of by way of a disqualification from driving, fine and costs.

The offence is a ‘relevant’ offence as specified under Section 113(1) of LA03 and is listed in Schedule 4 of the Act.  Under section 120(4) of the Act the Licensing Authority is required to give notice to the chief officer of police for the area.  Notice was given on 01 February 2013.

Representations were made on 04 February 2013 by Mike King Thames Valley Police Licensing Officer.  Nature of representations:  Crime and Disorder objective.

There is no evidence that mediation had taken place.

Mr Harry Frampton (Applicant), in addressing the Sub-Committee, raised the following points.  Mr Frampton was well aware that he had done a very silly thing.  He had not drunk alcohol during work hours, but after work.  He was a hard working individual who always tried to help the community.  He was fully aware of all the rules and regulations surrounding working within a pub environment and followed them.  He felt that he had been punished enough as his conviction had cost him £7.5k in total.

Councillor Paul Bryant asked Mr Frampton if he was currently working.  Mr Frampton said that he was as an Assistant Manager.  Cllr Bryant asked how long he had been an Assistant Manager.  Mr Frampton replied, over a year.  Councillor Jeff Beck asked Mr Frampton if he had any previous convictions.  Mr Frampton said that this was his first offence.  No further questions were asked.

Mr Nick Roffe (Mr Frampton’s employer) spoke in support of Mr Frampton.  He advised that he personally had held a licence for many years.  Mr Frampton was a diligent, hard working individual who never drank alcohol when he was working.  The background to the incident was that Mr Frampton had fallen out with his partner and was upset.  Mr Frampton had pleaded guilty and Mr Roffe believed that Mr Frampton had been punished enough.  Mr Roffe had put Mr Frampton through a number of training courses.  Mr Roffe also advised the panel that in his experience most licensees who had been convicted of drink driving had not lost  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.