The licence request to sell alcohol at a Polish convenience shop has been rejected by Preston City Council after facing objection from police and the Trading Standards Authority.Advertisement
Abdullah Taha, the owner of Nazsa Biedronka, located at 169 New Hall Lane, Preston, submitted a request on 27 July 2016 to authorise the retail sale of alcohol for consumption off the premises.
Both Police and Trading Standards Teams opposed the authorisation of the shop after a series of illegal tobacco sales became a breach of its licence objectives.
The hearing that took place on Thursday 22 September at Preston Town Hall saw the city council’s licensing sub-committee consider a number of representations put forward by Lancashire Constabulary, the Trading Standard’s Authority and Mr Taha.
Dawn Robinson, Principal Trading Standards Officer, reported issues with the convenience shop to Preston City Council and said: “This service is objecting on the grounds that the licensing objective relating to Prevention of Crime and Disorder is not being observed at this premise.
“On 4 August 2016, when Abdullah Taha owned the business, police officers seized 244 packets comprising 15 brands of illicit tobacco products from a bag behind the counter at Nazsa Biedronka.
“Each time offences are investigated, ownership of the business is transferred to a new name.
“With Mr Taha now in charge, the business is currently trading with its seventh owner since July 2013.”
Read more: Preston North End issue club statement after criminal damage to stadium
Lancashire Constabulary opposed the request for the licence along with Mr Taha taking on the role of DPS.
PS Bushell said: “There are exceptional circumstances that exist which would again undermine the Crime and Disorder licensing objective if granted.
“These particular premises have, over the past three years, a history of being associated with criminal activity with regards the sale of illicit tobacco and non-compliance with licensing conditions therefore making the sale of alcohol unlawful.”
After considering the representations put forward by all three parties, the Licencing Sub-Committee refused the application because they did not believe the prevention of crime and disorder licencing objective would be promoted at the premises if they had granted a licence.
Do you know the off-licence? Do you agree with the decision to refuse the licence? Let us know in the comments below