Decision Maker: Licensing Sub Committee E

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Date of Decision: January 20, 2026

Purpose:

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.