Beware pitfalls and
plethora of paperwork
If The Mail on Sunday thinks Andrew Cunningham is a friend of the licensed trade, it should look at the Licensing Regulations that have at long last been published by the Department for Culture, Media & Sport. It would take a different view.
The official charged with piloting the whole licensing reform package through has clearly been wearing a sleep mask and earplugs when it comes to the hundreds of representations made by the trade and other groups on the forms and procedures for the new legislation.
The Regulations covering such items as application forms, procedures, plans, advertising and hearings have now been officially produced, just over three weeks before the first applications can be made. As yet, no fees have been finalised and, on current form, these are likely to be announced on the morning of 7 February!
I cannot let this situation pass without commenting that this ludicrously short notice would have been totally unacceptable in the past and places both the licensed trade and local authorities in a most difficult position. What makes this lateness even harder to swallow is that, on first examination, Cunningham seems to have taken on board none of the very valid observations and criticisms that have been made by well-respected commentators, legal experts and organisations.
In fact, the forms appear to be very much in the same state as when they were issued for consultation back in September last year, including the same poor English and lack of comprehensive notes.
But above all, the application for the premises licence inparticular and its attendant requirements are full of pitfalls for the unwary.
The forms take a great deal of careful scrutiny, the requirements for the (compulsory) plan of the premises could certainly cause problems and the whole exercise is going to be particularly difficult for those for whom English is not necessarily their first language. The result could be confusion and re-application, whichneither the licensees nor the hapless local councils want at this stage.
The alternative for many may be to throw themselves on the mercy of the local authority and the police, in which case the likelihood is that they will obtain more or less what they have now, but possibly subject to one or two unforeseen conditions which may be slipped in to the new operating schedule.
Remember that this application is not being made at the behest of the council, but by you as an individual, stating both exactly what you have now and what you would like in the future. It will cost no more to apply for a variation, to obtain additional hours, for example, but of course you are going to have to advertise that variation in a specified form in a local newspaper, containing a number of items of information. On current advertisement rates, that will cost you anything between £100 and £500. In London it could be even higher.
What concerns me most of all is the amount of paperwork required, even compared with the current situation. To have to duplicate the whole application to the police (within 48 hours, not at the same time as the application to the council, as the notes suggest), and to provide a complete plan of the premises as well as a 20-page application form, consent forms and possibly notices to a number of responsible authorities, is going to be particularly difficult for the smaller operator and for tenant licensees.
Space does not allow me to go further today, but I will be attempting to give additional advice on specific aspects of the new application procedure over the next few weeks. However, those of you with an experienced licensing solicitor to hand would do well to get on the phone as soon as you finish reading this page.
