Changing rooms

Last year, I wrote about the acceleration in pub closures and the problems that can occur in finding an alternative use for premises owned by the licensee.

It would appear from the latest statistics that community pubs are the ones that are now under greater threat. Often these are properties into which the owner has sunk all his savings and now wishes to retire or move on.

Since then, several more licensees have written in to ask what the current legal position is on converting pubs to residential use. There is still the strong impression that because it is already part-residential for the licensee and his family, an application for change of use is a formality.

But this is not necessarily the case. The main problem is over gaining the required planning permission. Pub premises are in a commercial category under a specific-use class in planning terms and consent is required from the local council if a change of this kind is required.

Although some councils are recognising the current situation and being less rigid, the fact remains that when it comes down to the last pub in a locality, the rules for planning authorities are slightly more stringent, and they may take a less sympathetic view.

They have to be convinced that not only is the pub economically unviable as it stands, but that it would be so under any reasonable ownership. Clearly, if the council feels that a pub has been deliberately run down in order to "prove" that it is unviable, they will not necessarily be convinced that a change of use is desirable at the present time.

The fact that it is the last premises of its type in that particular location will make them reluctant to extinguish its planning use unless there is very sound evidence that a change is absolutely necessary. Many applications have been refused because the planners are not convinced that "the end of the road" has been reached.

In this situation, the feelings of local people do have some influence, although it must be said that planning decisions are taken on other criteria as well, as Lionel Fynn pointed out in Legal Extra last week.

The problem for many resident pub owners who are nearing retirement is that they would either like to stay in their pub or sell it at the best possible price and retire elsewhere.

In the current climate, as I have commented previously, it is understandable that a pub that has been granted planning permission for residential occupation could have a better market value than an ordinary business.

Q&A​

Reporting fake IDs​

Q. I am fairly new to the trade and on a couple of occasions recently I have challenged youngsters in the bar who have produced what is clearly fake ID. I have simply refused them and they have left, on one occasion with threats. Should I have reported this, and what can be done?

A. I regret to say that the police seem notably reluctant to pursue young people who are attempting to buy alcohol underage. In some areas this is a specific policy. In others, they simply see it as easier to target the licensee and his staff, because prosecuting children is viewed as bad public relations.

Some licensees are reluctant to contact the police on such matters, because they feel concerned that it will be viewed as a "black mark" against them. In spite of police protestations to the contrary, I gain the impression that any type of contact with the police advising them of a criminal activity may well be inadvertently logged as a "problem". It is probably better to raise such issues at a local pubwatch or police liaison meeting, so that the use of fake IDs is made more public.

Technically, the young person in question is already committing a criminal offence in attempting to buy alcohol, if they are underage. You should certainly record the name that is given on the ID and the refusal in an incident book. Whether you also report the incident directly to the police at that time may well depend on your current relationship with them.

Brand awareness​

Q. I have recently completed a licensed trade training course that covered the topic of bar service, where it was claimed that if someone asks for a Coke, you cannot serve them a Pepsi because it's illegal. That seems wrong: clearly most pubs will stock either one or the other, not both.

A. I have previously written about this topic, and it still holds true. You must not substitute one brand for another without giving the customer the chance to reject it.

So, if someone comes in and asks for a product by specific name, then you or your staff should say something along the lines of: "We don't stock brand X, but will brand Y do?"

In nine cases out of 10, that will be sufficient and there will be no problem. But periodically, both brand owners and trading standards officers get agitated over what they see as "passing off". They may even engage in test-purchasing to prove their point.

Cola products are prime candidates for unbranded mixtures, especially dispensers. There have been many occasions when a Coke has been requested, for example, and a post-mix cola has been substituted simply because the bar person did not know that it was wrong to do so.

In a few rare instances there will be a prosecution, and sometimes the company will seek damages. This is likely to happen more regularly as brand owners get together to prevent sharp practices in the licensed trade, which may come into play more during a time of recession.

Lost licence problem​

Q. I appear to have lost my personal licence. I have copies of correspondence and the training certificate, but not the licence itself. Can I carry on running the bar without it while I get a replacement?

A. Although you are required under the Licensing Act to have your personal licence available for inspection, your licence is technically still in force. It is granted to last for 10 years, so if it was granted initially during transition it will not expire until some time in 2015.

You should apply today to the local authority that originally granted it for a replacement, but report the loss first of all to the police. You will have to pay a fee of £10.50 for the replacement. You are not required to re-take the qualifying examination.