Memorandum by the Corporation of London
(RL 12)
The Corporation of London welcomes the opportunity
to make a short submission to the Committee ahead of their one
off evidence session on 31 October 2005 and would like to offer
the following observations.
The timetable has been very demanding for licensing
authorities with most applications being submitted in a very short
period before the deadline at the end of July and the start of
August. Whilst the Corporation managed to hold all its transition
hearings, it did so under considerable pressure of time and it
is understood that many other authorities experienced difficulties.
The time periods for hearings are very difficult and hearings
must be held even if the parties are close to agreement. Failure
to hold a hearing results in an automatic deemed refusal, and
is open to appeal. When parties are close to agreement however,
the hearing may be unnecessary and resources could be better employed
elsewhere. The expectation placed on Members to be available for
a great many hearings in a prescribed short period is arguably
unreasonable, particularly as many hearings have fallen within
the recess period. The small size of Licensing Committees has
exacerbated the problem as has the relatively late publication
of regulations and scale of fees.
Many applicants have found the forms to be long
and complex with even application solicitors disagreeing on what
information needs to be included. The information required is
in many places imprecise and does not, for example, require dates
of birth to be included. This results in added difficulties should
the police wish to comment on a personal licence application.
Government guidance for applicants invited licensing
authorities to discuss applications and help applicants complete
forms. In practice, this comment turned out to be unhelpful. Whilst
Officers did everything possible to assist, given the volume of
applications, the relatively small number of staff was unable
to spend the long periods of time each enquirer might have wanted.
In monetary terms the time needed to provide the advice and assistance
some applicants requested would cost more than the licence fee
let alone the other costs the fee is expected to cover.
There are also difficulties associated with
the advertising requirements. The detail required in the notice
to be placed in the window of the applicant premises should be
better prescribed and, for example include reference to any changes
in the licensing hours. The newspaper advertisement can be an
unnecessary and expensive requirement especially in the City where
there is no true local paper. This usually means the more costly
option of the Evening Standard.
There has also been a certain amount of difficulty
in determining the conditions which should be applied to licences
issued under the new legislation. This arises in particular where
the nature of conditions imposed under the old regime lack precision.
In consequence the obligations to be imposed under the new legislation
can only be established inferentially.
| 
