Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
Resolved that: In relation to the application to Review the Premises Licence in respect of Treharris RFC, Treharris the following steps be approved: (a) To issue a warning (b) To modify the conditions of the Licence (which includes adding new conditions, any alterations or omission of an existing condition or reducing permitted timings).
No apologies for absence were received as all Members were present.
No Declarations of Interest were made.
Decision as recorded
Resolved that: In relation to the application to Review the Premises Licence in respect of Treharris RFC, Treharris the following steps be approved: (a) To issue a warning (b) To modify the conditions of the Licence (which includes adding new conditions, any alterations or omission of an existing condition or reducing permitted timings).
The Chair welcomed Inspector R Gardiner, Sergeant Andrew Jones and PC Steven Moseley (South Wales Police), Matthew Edwards, Morgan Grindal, Tony Morgan and Tony Williams (Solicitor)representing Treharris RFC and the Officers to the Meeting. Matthew Herbert Licensing Officer then led the Committee in detail through the ‘Application to Review a Premises Licence – Treharris RFC’ report. PC Steven Moseley then referred the Committee to Appendices A and B in relation to the Licence and advised that the Licence holders and the DPS were not promoting the Licensing objectives. PC Moseley then gave details of the Licensing Objectives and referred to ensuring positive relationships between South Wales Police and Licensing Premises and he was appreciative of what clubs brought to the community. A review was taken as a last resort but that all avenues with the premises had been exhausted and advised of the time spent and the multiple visits that had been made to the premises. Reference was made to the loss of CCTV footage and PC Moseley read out the Licencing Conditions and the paragraph in relation to the CCTV equipment. PC Moseley then gave details of complaints and incidences that could not be proved or disproved due to lack of CCTV and the allegation made regarding the 23 January 2024 which was the latest failing in the supply of CCTV footage. A history was also given of the failure to provide CCTV contrary to the Licensing Conditions. PC Moseley then asked the Committee to consider a full range of sanctions and referred to the Licencing Objective being the prevention of Crime and Disorder. A Member then asked if there had been any incidents reported in relation to the granting of a Licence for the Firework event last November and PC Moseley responded that there had been nothing received by the Police after the event. Mr Williams then referred to the papers and that some complaints had been established as unfounded and PC Moseley responded that the hearing was not to discuss incidents but the numerous breeches of the Premises Licence. PC Moseley then referred to the malfunctions of the previous hard drive and that the system had needed to be replaced and how long had the system been out of action and what actions had been taken to rectify the fault as the footage could not be viewed as there was no previous footage from the old hard drive. The Committee were also advised that after the water leek forensic examination by South Wales Police of the CCTV system no footage could be gained. Inspector Gardener confirmed the details given by PC Moseley and that the Club had not complied with the conditions on five separate occasions with different Managers in position. Inspector Gardener referred to incidents of the night time economy and stated that he could not over emphasise the importance of CCTV as for every offence there was a victim and that this should be the centre of concerns. Inspector Gardener stated that he fully understood the importance of Clubs in Communities but that Clubs could not be allowed to operate outside Licensing Objectives and would ask that all this be taken into account by the Committee. A Member then asked if there were Committee Members present when the Club was open and a Club representative stated that for the majority of times there were Committee members in the club. Paul Lewis Head of Public Protection stated that he fully supported the Review and referred to Appendix B and Appendix E (the letter date 6 June 2023) and that he could not overemphasise the importance of CCTV to the late night economy. A Member then referred to the letter giving detail of the restructuring of the Club and asked if the two individuals referred to had experience in Licensing and any qualifications. Mr Williams advised that Mr Morgan the new DPS had held a licence for many years, Mr Edwards Club Chairman and Mr Grindle Secretary had been Club members for many years. Details were also given in relation to the previous Licence being held as a Limited Company on the guidance of the WRU but that the Premises Licence was now held by Mr Edwards and Mr Grindle which gave a greater level of accountability and together with Mr Morgan the new DPS the concerns of South Wales Police were addressed. A Member asked if CCTV was available last weekend and Mr Williams advised that since the new equipment had been installed in January 2024 there had been a number of visits to the Club and apart from the one occasion CCTV had been available and had also been used to identify a missing person. PC Moseley confirmed that last Monday CCTV was available and playback had been viewed. However, there were issues last year and failings during the re-structure. A Member then asked for details in relation to installation of the new system and was advised that the Club Committee were not made aware that it was not working and that transparency with the DPS had broken down and therefore he was unable to confirm who had done what but there was now a new high tec system. PC Moseley advised that on a visit in March 2023 the DPS had explained that she had no pin or password to access the account. A representative explained that at the time he thought that it was not a good idea to give access to the password but that after a visit the DPS had been given the password and that he had not been aware that this was part of the Licensing role. PC Moseley advised that the DPS was solely responsible for the supply of alcohol and had responsibilities regarding operation of the CCTV and should have had access. A representative advised that a lot of lessons had been learned and a lot of Conditions had been overlooked and accepted that he had given incorrect advice concerning the CCTV pin. Jo Baber then clarified that correspondence from the Licensing Section had been sent to the Club via e-mail. In response to a question by Paul Lewis in relation to information being supplied to the DPS the Committee were advised by Mr Morgan that going forward all bar staff and all Personal Licence holders will check at the start and end of a shift if the CCTV was functioning and that would be logged and if there were any issues they would report them to the DPS and if there was a serious issue with the CCTV then the bar would be shut and that he was a lot stricter and that he would shut the bar. He had also spoken to PC Moseley and was prepared to work with the Police going forward. Paul Lewis advised that the DPS should be the front face of the Club. A Member then requested details in relation to storage for the new CCTV. A representative advised that the hard drive was bigger than previously and complied with the 31 days requirement. Previously a dongle had been used for the Wi-Fi but that a new fibre line had been installed to ensure no breakdowns in the CCTV coverage. Further explanation was also given to the Police in relation to the hard drive in July and a description of the device handed into the Police. A representative also stated that it had been difficult as there had been no frontline transparency and that it was difficult to point fingers. Inspector Gardener then asked the representatives about their awareness of the operation of CCTV over the past twelve months and gave dates and a representative advised that they had not been aware that there was no CCTV. In response to a question from the Police regarding who was running the Club and how the DPS could run the Club with no access to CCTV a representative gave an explanation of the six month period at the end of May. There had been a lot going on and too much responsibility had been given to the DPS and the Committee had not been involved enough in the running of the Club but they were taking responsibility going forward. A Member then enquired in relation to the visibility of SIA door staff. Mr Morgan gave details of door staff and that the Police had undertaken a review and gave an explanation of the alleged incident that had been reported regarding a member of the door staff and said that in the future door staff would be noticeable and that he would be organising door staff going forward. There would also be a log for door staff and that as of Monday there was a log in place. A Member then enquired if all the complaints were being made by the same person and Joanne Baber gave information in relation to the complains that had been received. A Member then enquired of the Club Policy regarding children on the premises and a representative advised that there was a Safeguarding Officer on the Committee and that children were allowed in the premises until 8.00pm or if there was an event in the Club then it was 6.00pm and this was reviewed on a weekly basis. Mr Williams then advised that the Club had now taken positive action and referred to the new CCTV and that the previous DPS had been removed in December 2023. There were bar logs kept together with logging of the function of the CCTV. There was a real change in terms of leadership and that there was greater accountability as the Club was no longer a limited Company. Mr Morgan was now the new DPS and there was commitment to the Club and the Community. There were a number of different age group Rugby teams with sixty child members and gave details of the ages and numbers involved in Teams at the Club. Details were also given of events held at the Club and that the Club was central to the Community. The Licence was critical to the running of the Club and if suspended the Club could not cover costs. There was limited Sponsorship together with limiting the cost of membership. There had been issues of transparency and that there was now a new DPS and that issues had been addressed and remedies put in place. There were new premises holders, a new DPS a new Committee together with logs in place and CCTV. There would be greater dialogue and interaction with the DPS, Committee and the Police and a willingness and real desire to meet the Licensing objective and would ask the Committee not to suspend or revoke the Licence. Inspector Gardener then stated that he understood the importance of the Club to the Community and referred to the time and effort that had been taken by the Police regarding breaches and that the Police wanted to work with the Club. However, problems of the type described were not usually associated with a Club of this type, the Licensing failures described were more usually associated with premises involved in the night time economy. Simon Jones then advised that a lot of information had been provided to the sub Committee and that the sub Committee did not wish to make a quick decision on such an important matter and that it needed to fully consider everything that had been raised at the hearing. He then advised of the procedure that would be followed in relation to the decision made by the Committee on the hearing. The Chair then thanked all parties for attending the Meeting. All parties then left the Meeting. Considerable debate then ensued by the Members on the Review and what had been raised at the Meeting. After detailed consideration by the Committee it was Resolved that: In relation to the application to Review the Premises Licence in respect of Treharris RFC, Treharris the following steps be approved: (a) To issue a warning (b) To modify the conditions of the Licence (which includes adding new conditions, any alterations or omission of an existing condition or reducing permitted timings).
The Chair advised that there was no other business deemed urgent.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.