Store has alcohol licence suspended for a month (From Watford Observer)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting WO to 80360, or email us
Costcutter in Market Street also cannot sell cans stronger than 5.5%
2:48pm Thursday 5th July 2012 in News
By Ben Endley, Senior reporter
A Watford convenience store owner blamed for causing anti-social behaviour by selling high-strength lager to street drinkers has had his alcohol licence suspended for a month.
The ban was imposed on the Costcutter store in Market Street following a hearing of Watford Borough Council’s licensing sub-committee yesterday (Wednesday).
A condition has also been imposed on the store’s licence, banning it from selling cans stronger than 5.5 per cent alcohol.
The ruling comes as part of a police crackdown on anti-social street drinkers in the Market Street area.
The hearing was shown CCTV footage of several incidents of street drinkers congregating in Market Street and carrying out anti-social behaviour including one of the men dropping his trousers in close proximity to mothers and children.
The footage of two days in February 2012 shows groups of up to six men and women entering the store and buying high-strength lager and spirits which they then consumed in the street.
An emergency 999 call from a shopkeeper who was intimidated by the behaviour of the group was also played to the hearing.
John Corkett of Hertfordshire Constabulary’s licensing unit said this was the shop of choice for the street drinkers because two other convenience stores nearby operated stricter regulations about serving intoxicated people.
He added that when he and a fellow officer visited the store on several occasions and asked store owner Kuldeep Khaneja to sign an acceptable behaviour agreement to stop selling strong lager and single cans he refused because it would hurt his profits.
The hearing was also told of allegations from a 15-year-old schoolgirl who told police she had regularly been served alcohol in the store and had never been asked for ID.
Mr Corkett said: "We wanted him to co-operate with us to make the area a better place.
"I do hold him responsible [for the behaviour of the street drinkers] because they bought alcohol from his shop then they are seen drinking directly outside his shop.
"We advised him that as designated premises supervisor he should be only too aware of who these people are.
"It appears he is not taking much notice of what is going on around him."
Gill Sherratt of Licensing Matters represented Mr Khaneja in the hearing and accused the police of leading a witch hunt against Costcutter.
She said: "The point here is you are dealing with the problem that you say is with Costcutter but the problem is with the street drinkers.
"Have you ever told Mr Khaneja who these people are? How is he supposed to find out?"
Speaking after the hearing, Councillor George Derbyshire, chairman of the sub-committee said: "Licensees have a responsibility to help protect local residents, workers and children from anti-social behaviour and nuisance such as has been happening in Market Street.
"Selling high-strength drink to street drinkers is not acceptable."
Comments(11)
TRT
says...
4:07pm Thu 5 Jul 12
Yeah, those bags you get at the launderette are rubbish.
theturpster
says...
5:22pm Thu 5 Jul 12
crazyfrog
says...
9:50pm Thu 5 Jul 12
theturpster wrote:your bang on the money ! also you can regulate pubs easier than off licences
a UK ban on all shops and supermarkets selling booze, making the only place licenced to sell alcohol - pubs just like 60s and early 70s. If a shop needs to sell alcoholic beverages to make profit, surely they need to try harder at making non alcoholic products desirable to customers....
jtb1200
says...
11:06pm Fri 6 Jul 12
'blamed for causing anti-social behaviour by selling high-strength lager to street drinkers'
A shopkeeper blamed for causing what!? How does anyone work that one out? Is he responsible for deciding who is a worthy recipient of his goods? Is he allowed to deal, like for like, with aggression, should a customer object to his judgement? He's a shopkeeper - he sells his wares to anyone capable of paying. That's his job. That's his living. Those who are being anti-social are entirely responsible for their own actions.
And who are 'street drinkers' anyway? Did they morph from the drunks I've seen throughout my life? Have they been promoted? Be careful here boys & girls. Once labelled, these 'street drinkers' will gain 'rights' not available to the rest of us.
'part of a police crackdown on anti-social street drinkers in the Market Street area'
Oh really? Doesn't the law of the land apply throughout the land? Aren't the police responsible for public order everywhere? Isn't it the responsibility of the police to protect those of us (including this shopkeeper) who wish to go about our business unhindered? If badly behaved drunks congregate in that area and break laws, doesn't that make plod's job easier? Round 'em up and charge 'em. Leave those who want to trade and earn a profit to do so.
'Licensees have a responsibility to help protect local residents, workers and children from anti-social behaviour and nuisance such as has been happening in Market Street'
No they don't. The police do. If bad behaviour is commonplace in Market St or anywhere else for that matter, it's for the police to deal with.
If a licensee is responsible for consequences, they must be empowered to prevent or deal with any situation that the law deems them accountable for. They aren't. Only the police have the authority and structure to effectively deal with public order. Too many of the public have tried only to have found themselves being prosecuted.
I'm not anti police - far from it. But if the police/council solution to this problem is, in effect, to find him guilty of a crime that doesn't exist (he has a licence after all - so he can sell alcohol right?) and pass a sentence that restricts his trade, well.....wait for the day that a newsagent has a restriction placed on the sweets & crisps he can sell because some stupid fat parent has let their stupid fat kid get even fatter - it's all the shopkeepers fault.
mc77
says...
1:15am Sat 7 Jul 12
Something tells me you are unfamiliar with the laws and restrictions that one is required to uphold in order to have an alcohol license. Albeit by a shopkeeper, publican or restaurateur.
The Rover
says...
12:35pm Sat 7 Jul 12
mc77 wrote:The laws are clear, but put yourself in the position of the shopkeeper, and the hassle he would get by refusing to serve. Very easy to say he should not sell them alcohol, but there is a risk of confrontation by refusing to serve.
Well, thank you jtb1200.
Something tells me you are unfamiliar with the laws and restrictions that one is required to uphold in order to have an alcohol license. Albeit by a shopkeeper, publican or restaurateur.
jtb1200
says...
9:54pm Sat 7 Jul 12
I've never ran or worked in a pub, restaurant or off licence and therefore am not up to speed with what's expected, or indeed obligatory. I can see that a publican or restaurateur has some degree of control, and therefore culpability, for what happens on their premises but this story isn't about either.
It's about a shopkeeper who has been punished for doing the very thing he was granted a licence to do.
If the allegation of selling alcohol to a 15yr old girl is true then that is a clear breach of the law, so where is the prosecution?
His refusal 'to sign an acceptable behaviour agreement ' doesn't look good for him but is it a legal requirement?
Who drew it up? Is it a condition of his licence that he can't sell 'strong lager and single cans'?
I thought that sort of phrase was reserved for ASBO candidates/recipient
s.
If he's broken any laws he can only expect to get nailed for it.
My question is, has he? If not, what's he being punished for? His bad behaviour or someone elses ?
HertsPeter
says...
8:15am Sun 8 Jul 12
Street drinkers are in their own feral way quite astute, they know where to get the cheapest drink at the hours they want it. Likewise a bit of decent signage and a few firm refusals from retailers and the street drinkers are on their way, as they do not want attention from the OB.
How society deals with the drinking epidemic is in part another issue. But retailers who act irresponsibly are quite literally adding fuel to the fire. Maybe you don't care about that, but I do.
jtb1200
says...
8:19pm Sun 8 Jul 12
'Don't give it the civil liberties big one by squealing about his right to sell what he wants to whom he wants'
Who mentioned civil liberties? He doesn't have the right to sell alcohol, he has a licence - bought & paid for.
If he breaches the terms of that licence, by all means take it off him.
If a drunk misbehaves, it's entirely down to that individual. Instead of penalising a shopkeeper (or responsible drinkers who want to buy a product he's no longer allowed to sell), place any restrictions on the miscreant. Make it an offence for them to consume alcohol. Target the guilty
Toshhorn
says...
9:55am Tue 10 Jul 12
We need to get the tramps off the streets and off the booze.If the shopkeepers will not help put up their rates (not those who do help) to pay for the extra policing.Eventually will be cheaper to stop selling the beer than paying the increased rates
G_Whiz says...
3:17pm Thu 5 Jul 12
She said: "The point here is you are dealing with the problem that you say is with Costcutter but the problem is with the street drinkers.
"Have you ever told Mr Khaneja who these people are? How is he supposed to find out?"
Haha! another dumb and naive defence lawyer believing her client!
The drunks were right outside his door, he serves them, they stagger about and swear a lot.
Not rocket Science Gill!