The Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Sub-Committee of Brent Council met on Wednesday 17 June 2026. The primary item on the agenda was an application for an Adult Gaming Centre by 312 Investments Ltd for the premises known as Vault Casino, located at 574 High Road, Wembley. The meeting was scheduled to discuss this application, which had attracted numerous objections from local residents, elected officials, and a competing business.

Application for an Adult Gaming Centre at Vault Casino

The Sub-Committee was scheduled to consider an application from 312 Investments Ltd for a premises licence to operate an Adult Gaming Centre (AGC) at Vault Casino, 574 High Road, Wembley, HA0 2AA. The application was made under the provisions of the Gambling Act 2005.

The report pack detailed the application, which proposed the premises would operate as an Adult Gaming Centre. It noted that representations had been received and withdrawn from the Police and Licensing Officers, but that representations remained outstanding from Councillors, Members of Parliament, Public Health, and local residents.

The applicant, 312 Investments Ltd, had submitted a comprehensive Social Responsibility and Compliance Pack, a Local Area Risk Assessment (LARA), and other supporting documents. These documents outlined the company's policies and procedures for promoting socially responsible gambling, protecting children and vulnerable persons, customer interaction, crime and disorder prevention, and ensuring fair and open operations. The LARA identified numerous local facilities and demographics, including schools, support services, entertainment venues, and existing gambling premises, and assessed potential risks and proposed mitigation measures.

However, a significant number of objections were lodged against the application. These objections, submitted by various individuals and organisations including Barry Gardiner MP, Krupesh Hirani AM, Councillor Sonia Shah, Councillor Ketan Sheth, Public Health Brent, Silvertime Amusements Limited, and local residents, raised concerns primarily focused on the three licensing objectives under the Gambling Act 2005:

• Preventing gambling from being a source of crime or disorder: Objectors highlighted concerns about potential increases in anti-social behaviour, money laundering risks associated with AGCs, and the cumulative impact of a high concentration of gambling premises in the area.
• Ensuring gambling is conducted in a fair and open way: Concerns were raised about the transparency of operations and whether the proposed premises would operate fairly in a sensitive local context, particularly given the high levels of deprivation in the area.
• Protecting children and other vulnerable people from being harmed or exploited by gambling: This was a significant focus of the objections, with objectors citing Brent's high levels of gambling harm, the proximity of schools and support services for vulnerable individuals, and the potential for AGCs to normalise gambling for young people and those already at risk.

The applicant's additional information, submitted after initial representations, detailed the proposed operating conditions, which included measures such as CCTV, a 'Think 25' age verification policy, a minimum of two staff members on duty at all times (with SIA licensing during night hours), continuous customer monitoring, a banning policy for anti-social behaviour, and comprehensive staff training. The applicant also noted that the premises had previously held an AGC licence and that their director, Maxwell Davitt, had extensive experience in the industry. The applicant's legal representatives engaged with the Licensing Authority and the Police to agree on a set of conditions, which ultimately led to the Police withdrawing their formal representation.

The agenda also included standard procedural items such as apologies for absence and declarations of interest.