Content

Review of the
Premises Licence – Mare Street Wine Limited, 157a Mare
Street, London, E8 3RH
 
The decision
 
The Licensing Sub-Committee in considering
this decision from the information presented to it within the
report and at the hearing has determined that having regard to the
promotion of all the licensing objectives:
 
• 
The prevention of crime and disorder;
• 
Public safety;
• 
Prevention of public nuisance; and
• 
The protection of children from harm,
 
and in particular the prevention of crime and
disorder and public safety, made the following determination:
 
1. Modify the hours
and conditions of the premises licence.
 
• 
The hours of licensable activity to be modified as follows:
 
Supply of
Alcohol
 
 
Mon  08:00-00:00
Tue 
08:00-00:00
Wed  08:00-00:00
Thu 
08:00-01:00
Fri  08:00-02:00
Sat 
08:00-02:00
Sun 
08:00-00:00
 
 
Opening hours
 
Mon  08:00-00:00
Tue 
08:00-00:00
Wed  08:00-00:00
Thu 
08:00-01:00
Fri  08:00-02:00
Sat 
08:00-02:00
Sun 
08:00-00:00
 
• 
The following conditions to be added to the premises licence:
 
1.   CCTV
systems that capture head and shoulder images of persons entering
the premises and all points of sale shall be installed, operated
and record video images at all times.
 
2.   All
CCTV recordings shall be retained for not less than 31 days and
made available to the Police or an authorised officer of any
responsible authority within one hour upon request.
 
 
3.   A
member of staff capable of operating the CCTV system and
downloading images shall be present at the premises at all
times.
 
 
4.   The
CCTV system shall display on any recording the correct date and
time of the recording.
 
 
5.   An
incident book shall be kept and maintained at the premises and
shall be made available to a police officer or an authorised
officer upon request.
 
 
6.   The incident
book shall record:
 
 
o The date and time of any
incident
o The name of the staff member
recording it
o A brief description of the customer
concerned
 
 
7. 
  All of
the following incidents shall be recorded in the incident book
within 24 hours and retained for a minimum of 12 months:
 
o  
Incidents of violence by any person against another
o   Any
other criminal incidents
o   Any
visits by a relevant authority or emergency service
 
8.   A refusals
book shall be kept and maintained at the premises and made
available to a police officer or an authorised officer upon
request.
 
 
9.   The refusals
book shall record all refusals within 24 hours and be retained for
a minimum of 12 months, including:
 
o   Refusal
of sale of alcohol to any person under 18 years of age, or any
person who appears to be under 25 years of age and fails to produce
valid proof of age identification
o   Any
person attempting to purchase alcohol on behalf of someone under
18
o   Refusal
of sale of alcohol to any person who is, or appears to be,
drunk
 
10.    The
refusals book shall be examined on a regular basis by the
Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) or a nominated person. The
date and time of each examination shall be recorded in the book.
Regular analysis of refusals and data (e.g., time and day patterns)
shall be conducted by the DPS or nominated person to predict trends
and identify staff training needs.
 
11.   A fire risk assessment and
emergency plan will be prepared and regularly reviewed. All staff
will receive appropriate fire safety training and refresher
training.
 
12.   A prominent notice shall be
displayed at the exit from the premises 
requesting that patrons leave quietly
and respect the local area and residents.
 
13.  A notice shall be
displayed at the exit point informing customers not to litter after
leaving the premises.
 
14.   No deliveries shall be received
at the premises between the hours of 22:00 and 07:00 the following
day.
 
15. 
  A “Challenge
25” scheme shall operate at the premises to ensure that any
person attempting to purchase alcohol who appears to be under the
age of 25 provides documented proof that they are over 18 years of
age.
 
16.   Proof of age shall only comprise
a passport, a photocard driving
licence, an industry-approved proof of age card, or a Ministry of
Defence identity card.
 
17.   All reasonable steps shall be
taken to verify that any identification documents produced by
persons attempting to purchase alcohol are genuine and relate to
the person producing them.
 
18.   A prominent notice shall be
displayed at all entry points, alcohol display areas, and sales
points advising customers that the premises operates a “Challenge 25” proof of age
scheme.
 
19.   All staff responsible for
selling alcohol shall receive regular training on the main offences
under the Licensing Act 2003, including underage sales, sale of
alcohol to drunks and breaches of premises licence conditions.
Training shall include a copy of the premises licence conditions
for each staff member. Refresher training shall take place at least
every six months.
 
20.   A record of all staff training
in the Challenge 25 policy, including training and retraining dates
for each staff member, shall be kept for a minimum of 12 months and
made available within one hour upon request by a police officer or
an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority.
 
21.   All alcohol displays shall be
positioned so as to be clearly visible from the sales counter at
all times.
 
22. 
  No alcohol shall be sold
to known street drinkers, persons loitering outside the premises
causing nuisance, or any person reasonably suspected to be
associated with anti-social behaviour, noise nuisance, disturbance
or criminal activity, and this shall include any person identified
/ notified by the Police as someone to whom alcohol should not be
sold.
 
Reasons for the
decision
 
The Licensing Sub-Committee after considering
the application from the Weights and Measures Authority (Trading
Standards) to review the premises licence, and the representations
from the Responsible Authorities (the Police, and the Licensing
Authority), Other Persons (a local resident), the Premises Licence
Holder and their legal representative, together with the supporting
evidence presented to them, decided to modify the premises
licence.
 
The Sub-Committee took into consideration that
the Responsible Authorities (Trading Standards and the Police)
alleged a significant number of serious breaches of the conditions
of the premises licence which undermine the licensing objectives
and contributed to antisocial behaviour in the area. This led to
the review of the premises licence on the grounds of the prevention
of crime and disorder,  prevention of public nuisance and public
safety specifically citing the sale and seizure of illicit tobacco,
unverified alcohol, vape products and an underage illegal vape
sale.
 
The Sub-Committee took into consideration that
in view of the alleged breaches of the licence Trading Standards
made representations to seek revocation of the premises
licence.
 
The Sub-Committee heard representations from
Trading Standards that during a test purchase on the 5th August
2024 non-compliant cigarettes were sold at the premises.
 
The Sub-Committee heard representations from
the Police that they visited the premises on the 23rd of August,
and found illicit tobacco and oversized vapes behind the counter.
Also on the 15th of August 2025 oversized vapes were found and
there was an alleged underage sale of nicotine at the premises.
 
The Sub-Committee heard representations from
the Police that on the 24th October 2025 an inspection was carried
out during which duty evaded cigarettes were found. This raised
further concerns about alcohol stock branded with supermarket
labels and the absence of invoices and receipts. The Premises
License Holder was not present during this inspection due to a sick
relative and the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) was
responsible for the day-to-day running of the premises at the
time.
 
The Sub-Committee noted the Licensing
Authority highlighted that an application for a new Designated
Premises Supervisor was approved on 4th November 2025, and an
application for a minor variation of the premises licence was
refused on
11th November 2025.
 
The Sub-Committee heard representations from
Trading Standards that the premises over a period of time have been
suspected for illegal activity and particularly around the groups
that have been seen around the area and there had been complaints
of antisocial behaviour. Trading Standards acknowledged that there
was some work done to improve the premises. However, these alleged
breaches undermine the licensing objectives and are referred to in
the Guidance issued by the Home Office under section 182 of the
Licensing Act 2003 (paragraph 11.10). These alleged breaches are
contrary to section 144 of the Licensing Act 2003, which makes it
an offence to keep smuggled or unlawfully imported goods on any
relevant premises.
 
The Sub-Committee heard representations that
the goods seized by Trading Standards on each occasion are
suspected to have been smuggled or illegally imported as they are
not permitted to be sold in the UK. Trading Standards also has the
duty of protecting young people from the harms associated with the
sale of age restricted products.
 
The Sub-Committee took into consideration the
representations from the Police and the Licensing Authority that
they both had no confidence that the Premises Licence Holder could
comply with the conditions attached to their licence and operate
the premises responsibly. The Police made representations that the
premises was very well known for
antisocial behaviour, street drinkers, suspected single cigarette
sales and suspected drug dealing/handling stolen goods. It was
noted that there was a significant period of time of non-compliance
with the licence from 2024 to 2025.
 
The Sub-Committee heard representations from
the Responsible Authorities that they do not take supporting a
review lightly, and they have only seen changes and improvements
when the premises licence is at risk of being revoked. They felt
there was no resolution to improve the operation of the premises or
action to rectify the concerns previously raised. The Sub-Committee
noted the Responsible Authorities had no confidence that new
measures will be implemented. The Sub-Committee took into account
that both the Police and the Licensing Authority supported
revocation of the premises licence.
 
The Sub-Committee took into consideration the
representations from the Premises Licence Holder’s legal
representative that the premises licence was granted on 24th
November 2005. Since 2024 when the premises was transferred to the Premises Licence Holder there
have been no reviews or no enforcement action taken. A new DPS was
appointed in November 2025, the Premises Licence Holder is also now
a personal licence holder and the premises have been improved. The
Sub-Committee heard representations that compliance with the
premises licence has been restored. The Premises Licence
Holder’s legal representative made representations that
revocation of the licence is not proportionate and the licensing
objectives are now promoted under the control of the new
management.
 
The Sub-Committee heard from the Premises
Licence Holder that they were remorseful and apologised for what
had occurred. They accepted the findings of Trading Standards and
the serious concerns of the Police and the Licensing Authority that
the actions that they took previously were completely unacceptable.
The Sub-Committee heard that the Premises Licence Holder had
extenuating circumstances. Her mother was taken seriously ill and
she relied on the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) to look
after the premises while she was away supporting her mother. The
premises were subsequently not run well by the DPS who has since
been replaced.
 
The Sub-Committee heard representations from a
local resident who objected to the review application, and felt the
problems in the area are not as a result of the
premises. 
 
The Sub-Committee seriously considered all the
options available to them however they did not feel that revocation
or suspension of the premises licence was necessary given the
improvements that the Premises Licence Holder has made with the
assistance of the Responsible Authorities.
 
The Sub-Committee took into consideration that
the Responsible Authorities had no confidence in the Premises
Licence Holder given the incidents that have previously taken place
and that they have failed to make improvements following the
alleged breaches of the licence.
 
The Sub-Committee noted that the Police felt
that revocation was still necessary as there were no mitigating
factors and they failed the test purchase. The Police had no
confidence that anything was going to change at the premises.
 
The Sub-Committee took into account that the
Licensing Authority had not heard anything in the proceedings about
how the premises would change and would improve. It was noted that
the Licensing Authority felt there was no mitigation for the
breaches, and they still supported revocation of the licence as
they had no confidence in the Premises Licence Holder.
 
The Sub-Committee felt there was no evidence
that the issues that were witnessed by the Police and Trading
standards have been repeated. This is as a result of the work of
the Police and Trading standards to highlight the concerns. The
business owner and the Premises Licence Holder has taken
significant steps to overcome concerns, and to put in place a
reliable DPS who raises no concerns.
 
However, the Sub-Committee shares some of the
concerns of the Police, the Licensing Authority, and the Trading
Standards, and they took on board the seriousness of the repeated
failures to comply with the premises licence previously which
undermined the licensing objectives.
 
The Sub-Committee felt the comprehensive
amended conditions will help to alleviate the Illicit sale of vapes
and alcohol and will help to improve the operation of the premises,
and the licensing objectives would not be undermined. The
Sub-Committee felt reassured that the Police will continue to
monitor the premises to ensure the conditions will be complied
with.
 
The Sub-Committee took into consideration that
the former Designated Premises Supervisor had been removed and was
responsible for the alleged breaches that occurred previously, and
a new DPS had been appointed. The Sub-Committee had no concerns
about the new DPS who is an experienced operator and the freeholder
of the premises. The Sub-Committee noted there were no recent
concerns about the premises under new management that demonstrated
two and a half months of compliance with no reported incidents
 
The Sub-Committee felt that with modified
conditions and hours on the licence, the premises would improve and
be run in a manner that complied with the conditions of the
licence, and would promote the licensing objectives.
 
Public
Informative
 
The Premises Licence Holder is advised to
ensure that they comply with all the conditions attached to the
premises licence and to operate the premises
responsibly.