Licensing Act 2003

Notice of Decision

PREMISES

The Chequers

121 North Street

Hornchurch

RM11 1ST

APPLICANT

Chief Officer of Police for Havering Borough

Details of requested licensable activities

The application for an expedited review of a premises licence is made under section 53A of the Licensing Act 2003 by Chief Officer of Police for Havering Borough.  The application was received by Havering’s Licensing Authority on 13th March 2026.

Summary

During the application’s consultation period the Licensing Authority received two representations from responsible authorities supporting the Police review, namely the Licensing Authority and Havering’s child welfare department.  In addition, a representation supporting the premises was submitted by a customer of the pub.

The purpose of this hearing is to decide what steps the licensing sub-committee considers appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives and to decide whether the interim licence suspension ceases to have effect altogether or becomes the subject of any steps which it considers are appropriate when making its determination on the review.  The steps the licensing authority can take are:

•           the modification of the conditions of the premises licence;

•           the exclusion of a licensable activity from the scope of the licence;

•           the removal of the designated premises supervisor from the licence;

•           the suspension of the licence for a period not exceeding 3 months; and

•           the revocation of the licence.

Determination of application to review of the premises licence

1.         The Licensing Sub-Committee (“LSC”) considered an application for an expedited review of the premises licence for the premises known as ‘The Chequers’ situated at 121 North Street Hornchurch RM11 1ST.

2.         This decision should be read in conjunction with the LSC’s interim decision dated 17th March 2026 in respect of these premises.

3.         On the 9th of April 2026, the LSC convened to consider a full premises licence review under section 53C of the Licensing Act 2003 in respect of the premises known as The Chequers.

4.         The LSC considered a number of submissions including those from Mr Ed Cary, counsel for the Metropolitan Police Service (“MPS”), Mr Oisin Daly for the Council’s Licensing Team (“CLT”), Mr Duncan Craig, counsel acting for The Chequers (“the respondent”), Mr Parvinder Sandhu the new premises licence holder for the premises, Mr Hopkins licensing agent for the premises and also read the supporting representations of a local resident.

5.         The LSC further considered the proposed modification of the premises licence submitted by Mr Duncan Craig.

6.         The LSC determined that the premises licence shall be suspended for a period of four weeks and the premises licence shall be modified as set out below in paragraph 12(F).

7.         The LSC further determined that the interim steps imposed on the 17th March 2026 are no longer necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives and this modification of the premises licence replaces the interim step.

Reasons

8.         The LSC heard from the MPS team who amplified their written application and evidence. The members viewed CCTV footage presented by the MPS which showed serious violent disorder at the premises involving two groups totalling around ten people. The disorder included punches and kicks delivered by the two groups, including at least one person picking up and throwing a chair at another patron. The footage also showed one kick being delivered to the head of someone who was lying on the floor. The LSC heard that the staff at the premises did not call the Police for assistance and neither was an entry made in their incident logbook when Police visited on the 13th March 2026, undermining police confidence in the management of the premises.

9.         The CLT, who supported the MPS application, stated in their opinion the premises was habitually operated beyond its licensable hours by serving alcohol after the terminal hours of the licence. Mr Daly presented a schedule detailing 17 entries taken from a till showing sales being made after the premises’ terminal hours covering the period July 2025 to March 2026. Mr Daly concluded that in the CLT’s opinion the premises disregarded the permitted licensable hours and created a culture of afterhours drinking. He added that if the premises had complied with the restrictions on the premises licence, the violent incident would have been avoided.

10.       The Council’s Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) supported the MPS’s application for an expedited review of the premise licence to the effect that the inadequacy of the management of the premises poses a safeguarding risk to children who may attend the premises with their families.

11.       Turning to the respondent, in summary he accepted that there had been failings at the premises which included operating beyond the licensable hours on the night of the incident. The premises licence holder explained that the health of the previous licence holder, Mr Parvinder Sandhu’s father, had deteriorated shortly before the night of the incident and as a result of his health issues, the family had already made a decision to transfer the premises licence to Mr Parvinder Sandhu. The premises licence holder’s representative added that Mr Parvinder Sandhu had previously run the premises for a number of years and during that time the premises had no regulatory issues. They further added that this is the first and only issue that the premises has had over  twenty  years and as a result of the incident, the premises’ operators decided to take professional help by instructing a licensing agent and specialist licensing counsel to draft and propose fresh conditions that are appropriate, unambiguous and proportionate to prevent an incident like this occurring again and also to bring the licence up to date with the current licensing regime.

12.       The LSC considered which step is the most appropriate to promote the licensing objectives:

a.         Revocation

The LSC very strongly considered revoking the premises licence. The LSC was conscious that the MPS, as its main source of advice on crime and disorder, made the expedited review application seeking revocation and did not depart from this position even after having reviewed the proposed conditions. The LSC was shocked at the level of violence at the premises and the flagrant disregard of the conditions of the licence. The LSC found that the premises had been operating outside its licensable hours, not only on the night of the incident but over a lengthy period of time. Having said that, the LSC found the most appropriate and proportionate step to take in order to address the causes of concern is to suspend the licence and to impose fresh conditions on the licence. The LSC was conscious that should there be any further serious failings at the premises, in particular as a result of poor management, the responsible authorities are able submit a fresh review application and the subsequent LSC will have the premises’ history included in its agenda pack.

b.         Suspension

The LSC found that a suspension of the licence for a period of four weeks is the necessary and proportionate remedial action in this instance. The suspension will provide adequate time for the premises’ operators to finalise their draft policies, to have those polices examined by the relevant responsible authorities and, importantly, the suspension would also allow time for all staff, including the licence holder, to obtain training from a reputable licensing training provider. The suspension will also give the premises a transitional period during which the premises licence holder, Mr Parvinder Sandhu, will take charge of the premises. Finally, the suspension, with the imposition of fresh conditions, will also act as a deterrent for future non-compliance and will promote the licensing regime.

c.         No Action & Warning

The LSC found that taking no action and giving an informal warning will seriously undermine the licensing regime.

d.         Exclusion of licensable activity

The LSC found that this action will in effect have the same consequences as revocation.

e.         Removal of DPS

The LSC found that removing the DPS is unnecessary given that the premises licence holder has already applied to install a new DPS who will also be subject to the fresh and periodical training.

f.          Modify Licence 

The LSC  was presented with a set of fresh licensing conditions drafted by counsel for the respondent.  The respondent submitted that the unambiguous conditions are likely to ensure that Mr Parvinder Sandhu understands the licence and the compliance needed to prevent the licensing objectives being undermined in the future. The LSC noted that none of the responsible authorities took issue with the licence conditions; the issue for the LSC was whether Mr Parvinder Sandhu would be a responsible premises licence holder and is able to be trusted with implementing the licence provisions. The LSC acknowledged that none of the responsible authorities have any records of Mr Parvinder Sandhu or the premises having any issues and that he showed an endeavour to seek professional advice to ensure that he and the premises do not fall foul of the licensing regime. Therefore, the LSC resolved to impose the proposed conditions, with some of its own modification and these conditions will supersede the existing conditions as detailed below;

1.         CCTV shall be installed, operated, and maintained, to function all times that the premises is open for licensable activities. Said CCTV will comply with the following criteria:

a.         The licensee will ensure that the system is checked every two weeks to ensure that the system is working properly and that the date and time are correct.

b.         A record of these checks, showing the date and name of the person checking, will be kept and made available to the police or other authorised officer on request; (c) The Police will be informed if the system will not be operating for longer than one day of business for any reason;

c.         Cameras will show a close-up of all entrances and exits to the premises, to capture a clear, full length image of anyone entering;

d.         The system will provide full coverage of the interior of the premises and any exterior part of the premises accessible to the public and produce clear and unobstructed footage in any lighting condition;

e.         The system will record in real time and recordings will be date and time stamped; (g) At all times during operating hours, there will be at least 1 member of staff on the premises who can operate the system sufficiently to allow Police or authorised Council officers to view footage on request.

f.          Recordings will be kept for a minimum of 31 days and downloaded footage will be provided free of charge to the police or other authorised officers on request (subject to the Data Protection Act 2018) within 24 hours of any request.

g.         Signage stating that CCTV is in operation will be clearly and prominently displayed at the premises.

h.         The use of CCTV at the premises shall be registered with the Information Commissioners Office [ICO].

2.         An incident log shall be kept at the premises, and made available on request to the police or an authorised officer, which will record:

a.         Any and all allegations of crime or disorder reported at the venue

b.         Any and all complaints received by any party

c.         Any faults in the CCTV system

d.         Any visit by a relevant authority or emergency service

e.         Any and all ejections of patrons

f.          Any and all seizures of drugs or offensive weapons

3.         The licence holder will ensure that all staff, including the premises licence holder and DPS, are trained on relevant matters, including the conditions of the premises licence, age restricted products and [if they are ever left in charge of the premises] the operation of the CCTV system and how to deal with visits from authorised officers and conflict management training.  The licensee shall keep written records of training and instructions given to each member of staff, detailing the areas covered to include the Licensing Objectives, identifying persons under 25, making a challenge, acceptable proof of age & checking it, making & recording a refusal, avoiding conflict & responsible alcohol retailing. Staff shall sign to confirm that they have received and understood the training. All staff who work at the till will be trained for their role on induction and be given refresher training every six months. The written training records kept for each staff member will be produced to police & authorised council officers on request. The initial training must be provided by a reputable external training provider.

4.         In the event that crime or serious disorder is, or appears to have been, committed on the premises, the management will immediately ensure that:

a.         The police and, where appropriate, the London Ambulance Service, are called immediately;

b.         As far as is safe and reasonably practicable, all measures will be taken to apprehend any identified suspects pending the arrival of the police;

c.         As far as is safe and reasonably practicable, all measures will be taken to preserve any identified crime scene pending the arrival of the police;

d.         Any and all appropriate measures are taken to fully protect the safety of all persons present on the premises at all times during operating hours.

5.         The premises shall operate the following policies listed a to f below and these policies must be retained on site and made available to any of the responsible authorities on request. Key points from all policies must be integrated into any staff training

a.         Drugs Policy

b.         Safeguarding and Vulnerability Policy including WAVE training

c.         Noise Management and Dispersal Policy

d.         Security and Incident Management Policy and Security Risk Assessment

e.         Fire Risk Assessment

f.          General Health and Safety Policy

6.         The Security & Incident Management Policy and Security Risk Assessment must be approved by the Metropolitan Police Service and the Council’s Licensing Authority and until both authorities approve the draft policies, the licence shall not be operative.

7.         All glasses in use at the premises shall be either toughened glass or polycarbonate material.

8.         Prominent, clear and legible notices must be displayed at all exits requesting the public to respect the needs of local residents and to leave the premises and the area quietly.

9.         The premises will operate the 'Challenge 25' proof of age scheme.

i.          All staff will be fully trained in its operation.

ii.         Only physical production of suitable forms of photographic identification, such as passport or UK driving licence, or a holographically marked PASS scheme cards will be accepted. A screenshot or digital document copy will not be sufficient except for Government Approved digital ID.   

10.       Children shall not be permitted on to the premises after 7pm until closing and during permitted hours, they shall be supervised by the accompanying adult at all times.

Right of Appeal

Any party who has made a relevant representation may appeal to the Magistrates’ Court within 21 days of notification of the decision.

On appeal, the Magistrates’ Court may:

1.         Dismiss the appeal; or

2.         Substitute the decision for another decision which could have been made by the Sub Committee; or

3.         Remit the case to the Sub Committee to dispose of it in accordance with the direction of the Court; and

4.         Make an order for costs as it sees fit.