Subscribe to updates

You'll receive weekly summaries about Islington Council every week.

If you have any requests or comments please let us know at community@opencouncil.network. We can also provide custom updates on particular topics across councils.

Licensing Sub Committee A - Wednesday, 26th February, 2025 6.30 pm

February 26, 2025 View on council website Watch video of meeting
AI Generated

Summary

The Licensing Sub-Committee decided to modify the premises licence of the Sekforde Arms, a pub on 34 Sekforde Street. The committee relaxed the conditions on opening windows after 8pm, as requested in a Minor Variation Application made by the licensee. Instead they decided that the area used for drinking outside the pub should be strictly demarcated. A detailed plan of the outside drinking area will be agreed with the Licensing Authority.

Noise Complaints and Breaches of Licence Conditions

Islington Council’s Licensing Authority submitted an application to review the premises licence of the pub. The application was made under the Licensing Objective of the prevention of public nuisance. The review application was submitted in response to a significant number of complaints received by the Council from residents, regarding nuisance and associated anti-social behaviour at the pub. The application also highlighted significant evidence of recurring breaches of the conditions on the pub’s premises licence. The Licensing Authority had previously engaged with the licensee, Mr David Lonsdale and the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) Mr Harry Smith on a number of occasions to discuss the complaints and breaches of the conditions. A Licensing Officer Panel Meeting was also held on the 23 August 2023 to try and resolve the issues. However, after the meeting, complaints of nuisance and breaches of the conditions continued, prompting the Licensing Authority to submit their application for review. The review application highlighted two key breaches of licence conditions. Firstly, that on many occasions, more than 20 customers had been found drinking in the outside area of the pub after 8pm, in breach of the condition that only 20 customers could be in this area after 8pm. Secondly, that customers were frequently found drinking whilst standing outside the pub in breach of the condition that all customers drinking outside the pub should be seated. A number of residents attended the meeting and gave evidence about the impact the pub has had on their quality of life. They explained that they frequently experience noise from customers leaving the pub late at night, and from customers drinking and socialising outside the pub in the evenings. They explained that they have experienced noise nuisance on most nights of the week, but particularly on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays. They also highlighted that noise nuisance was much worse in the summer months, when the weather is hot, but that they had experienced nuisance at other times of year as well. The residents provided evidence to the meeting which showed customers drinking in undesignated areas, and customers drinking whilst standing. One of the residents, who has lived on Sekforde Street for many years, provided the meeting with a log of all of the occasions he has witnessed the pub breaching its licence conditions. He explained that he had documented over 200 breaches across 110 separate instances. The residents stated that in their opinion, the existing conditions of the licence were sufficient to prevent nuisance, but that the current management of the pub were unwilling to comply with them. They argued that any relaxation of the existing licence conditions would further damage their quality of life and lead to an escalation of noise nuisance. They called for the existing conditions to be strictly enforced and argued against making any changes that might weaken them. The residents also argued that the pub management do not appear to understand the street and its context. One resident explained that he had had a conversation with Harry Smith, in which Mr Smith had claimed that Sekforde Street is a commercial street and not a residential street. They also complained that the pub’s noise management plan fails to recognise the residential context of the street. The residents made a number of suggestions as to how the existing licence conditions could be improved and strengthened. They suggested installing a rope barrier around the outside drinking area, to more clearly delineate the area in which customers could drink. They also suggested that the council should consider making Woodbridge Street a pedestrian zone. The residents also complained that they had experienced harassment and anti-social behaviour from the licensee. They submitted evidence to the meeting of the licensee shouting insults at them and their children. They also submitted evidence of pub customers urinating outside their homes. The residents explained that they were so intimidated by the licensee that they had applied to the council for their identities to be protected, and to be allowed to give evidence from another room, with their voices being broadcast into the council chamber. The committee agreed to this request. The residents argued that these incidents of harassment should not be considered by the committee as they are police matters and not licensing matters. They explained that they are currently in communication with the police about them, and that the police have put in place a protective management plan to address them.

Licencee Response

David Lonsdale, the licensee of the pub, explained to the meeting that he has owned the pub for 20 years. He explained that when he acquired the property in 2015 it had been an unprofitable failing pub, but that he had transformed the business with the help of his manager Harry Smith. He stated that in his opinion the pub is well-run and popular with residents. Mr Lonsdale disputed the characterisation of the street as a quiet residential street. He argued that the street is a busy thoroughfare with a mixture of residential and commercial premises. He stated that he has installed CCTV cameras at the pub and that they are used to deter crime. Mr Lonsdale also argued that the current conditions on the licence are unworkable. He stated that in his opinion they are overly strict and that no other pub in Islington has to operate under such restrictive conditions. He explained that it has been impossible for him and his staff to comply fully with the condition that only one window on the ground and first floor can be open after 8pm. He explained that in hot weather this condition has meant that the pub is unbearably hot and that both customers and staff have found it difficult to cope with the heat. He explained that on one occasion, a customer collapsed and had to be treated for heatstroke. He also explained that one of the bar staff who was pregnant complained to him that she could not cope with the heat, especially when going up and down the stairs to the first floor ballroom. Mr Lonsdale also objected to the condition that the door to Sekforde Street must be closed at 9pm. He explained that the only effective way to comply with this condition is to lock the door, but that he had been advised by a fire officer that it is unlawful to lock a fire door. He also argued that there is no need for this condition anyway, as customers are allowed to be outside the pub until 10pm, and that it is therefore inevitable that they will use the door. Mr Lonsdale suggested that the committee consider adopting the conditions he had previously suggested in his Minor Variation application, which had been rejected by the licensing authority. He explained that the conditions in this application had been drafted with the help of a police licensing officer. Mr Lonsdale stated that if the committee agreed to his proposed conditions he would, as a gesture of good will, find a way of creating an acoustic lobby at the Sekforde Street door, to further reduce noise nuisance. Harry Smith, the Designated Premises Supervisor, explained that he has been running the pub since December 2023. He stated that he believes he is running the pub well, and that he strives to promote good relationships with local residents. Mr Smith explained that he has tried to enforce the existing conditions of the licence, but that this has not always been easy. He argued that the condition that the door to Sekforde Street must be closed at 9pm is dangerous, and that it makes him nervous when the door is locked. He explained that on one occasion he had had a particularly unpleasant encounter with a customer who had been drinking heavily. The customer had been using the Sekforde Street door and Mr Smith had explained to him that it was against the conditions of the licence for him to be using it. The customer became angry and intimidating. Mr Smith explained that he was concerned that if the door had been locked, the customer might have become violent. Mr Smith also provided evidence to the meeting that the pub was already operating in such a way that the licensing objective of preventing public nuisance is being achieved. He highlighted that the pub had received very few negative reports from Parkguard in the last year. He argued that this is evidence that noise nuisance has been effectively controlled. He suggested to the committee that the conditions in the Minor Variation application he submitted last year, would allow him to effectively manage noise nuisance from the pub. He explained that the key elements of this variation application were a relaxation of the condition requiring windows to be closed at 8pm and a removal of the condition limiting the number of customers allowed to stand outside in Woodbridge Street after 8pm. A number of local residents also attended the meeting to support the pub. The residents explained that they value the pub as a community asset and that they do not experience noise nuisance from it. One resident, who has lived on Sekforde Street for 30 years, explained that she thinks that having people outside the pub in the evenings actually makes the street safer. Other residents argued that the complainants in the case have an unreasonable intolerance to noise. One resident explained that she has been able to build a good relationship with the pub’s management and that she has found them to be approachable and willing to listen to her concerns. Another resident, who works as a journalist, argued that the campaign against the pub has become vexatious and that it is being driven by a small number of grudge-bearing neighbours. He stated that these residents have made unrealistic demands, such as asking the pub to have fewer customers. He argued that it is unrealistic for residents to expect that a pub in a mixed-use area like Clerkenwell should not be allowed to have customers drinking outside in the summertime. He stated that the pub management have already done all they can to accommodate the demands of the complainants, and that it is unreasonable to impose any further restrictions on the pub. The residents in support of the pub also took issue with the complainants’ characterisation of the licensee, David Lonsdale. They stated that they have found him to be friendly and polite. One resident stated that he has known Mr Lonsdale for 42 years and that he found the comments about him made during the meeting to be “completely unrecognisable” and “unacceptable.” Another resident, who is a friend of Mr Lonsdale, disputed the residents' claims that Mr Lonsdale has harassed them. He explained that the video submitted as evidence of Mr Lonsdale harassing people, actually shows Mr Lonsdale talking to him and his wife, who are friends of Mr Lonsdale. Another resident, who is also a friend of Mr Lonsdale, argued that the existing licence conditions are unworkable. She explained that she lives above the pub with her husband and son, and that because of the conditions, they are unable to open the windows when it is hot, and are unable to use the Sekforde Street door after 9pm, even when going outside to have a private conversation.
One resident spoke in support of the Sekforde House Trust, a charitable organisation that is funded by the profits of the pub. The resident explained that he had personally benefited from a scholarship awarded by the Trust. He argued that the pub is the financial backbone of the Trust, and that the complainants in the case are jeopardising the Trust’s mission to provide financial support to young people, by attempting to close the pub. When asked to suggest possible alternatives to the current licence conditions, the residents supporting the pub generally stated that they thought the existing conditions, if adhered to, are sufficient. However, they also argued that some of the conditions, particularly those relating to the closing of windows and doors, are unworkable and should be relaxed. They argued that the most important thing is for the pub management to comply with the existing licence conditions and that there is no need for any further restrictions. One resident suggested that the council should consider making Woodbridge Street a pedestrian zone on certain nights. In their summing up, the residents supporting the pub argued that the pub is a valuable community asset and that it is very important to allow the pub to survive. They highlighted that there is a strong consensus amongst the local community in support of the pub, and that they are concerned that the complaints of a small number of residents could lead to the closure of the pub. They stated that they hope the committee will take into account the many representations submitted by residents in support of the pub, and will make a decision that will allow the pub to continue trading.
In their summing up, the pub management reiterated their objection to the current conditions relating to the closing of windows at 8pm, and the closing of the Sekforde Street door at 9pm. They stated that they believe it is unreasonable to impose any further restrictions on the pub. They asked the committee to consider the positive impact the pub has had on the local community and to make a decision that will allow the pub to thrive in the future. In their summing up, the licensing authority acknowledged that there is a consensus that some of the existing licence conditions need to be reviewed. They acknowledged that the conditions in the licensee’s Minor Variation application could be helpful in achieving this. They suggested that the committee consider making it a condition of the licence that a noise management plan be agreed between the licensee and the licensing authority. The committee decided to adopt a number of the conditions from the licensee’s Minor Variation application, including a relaxation of the condition requiring windows to be closed at 8pm. They also decided that the area used for drinking outside the pub must be strictly delineated by a rope barrier and that a detailed plan of the outside drinking area will be agreed with the licensing authority. They also decided to retain the existing condition requiring the Sekforde Street door to be closed at 9pm, but amended it so that it will cease to apply when an acoustic lobby or acoustic curtain has been installed, as agreed by Islington Council.

Attendees

Councillor Heather Staff
Councillor Gary Heather
Councillor Roulin Khondoker

Documents