To appoint a Chairman for the duration of the meeting.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Councillor Luxton be appointed Chairman for the duration of the meeting.

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor Sharp. Councillor Derek Wilson substituted.

To receive any declarations of interest.

There were no declarations of interest received.

To consider an application to vary a licensed premises machine permit under the gambling act 2005.

The Chairman welcomed all the parties to the meeting, introduced the Sub-Committee Members and explained the procedure, which all indicated they understood.

Licensing Officer

The Council’s Licensing Officer, Steve Smith, introduced the application for Members to consider. Steve Smith explained that the application related to a variation of an existing licensed premises gaming machine permit, under the Gambling Act 2005, at The Bear, 8-10 High Street, Maidenhead, SL6 1QJ. The existing permit allowed for 4 category C machines. A category C machine is one that has a maximum stake of £1 and a maximum prize of £100.00. Members’ policy was to delegate to officers to issue permits for up to 4 machines. For more than this, applications were referred to the Sub-Committee.

The Licensing Officer explained that the premises was large and the new machine would be in good line of site from the bar.

Members were told that no objections to the application had been received and the licensing team had experienced no issues with the premises, either from a licensing or gambling perspective. The Licensing Officer informed the Sub-Committee that they must have regard to the four Licensing Objectives and the Council’s policy. He informed the Sub-Committee that the options open to them were to either allow or refuse the whole of the application.

Questions to the Licensing Officer

The Licensing Officer was asked what constituted “fair” in gambling. He explained that the machines were in line of view from the bar and not next to a cash machine.

The Licensing Officer was asked if the owner could change the odds. He explained that the odds were fixed and set by the game.

The Licensing Officer was asked how the age of users was checked. He explained that there had been no reported issues for this premises. Any underage users were challenged and the borough carried out annual checks.

Applicant’s case

Mr Parrish, the area manager for Wetherspoons, explained that the application was for a new Category C machine to be installed due to increased demand. The premises had an experienced manager with an experienced team working with her. The manager and staff worked very closely with the licensing team.

Mr Parrish told the Sub-Committee that Wetherspoons operated a strict Challenge 21 Policy, and that all new staff were trained in this in at their induction training and received yearly training. He stated that all incidents of a customer being challenged under the policy were recorded, before being reviewed on a weekly basis.

Questions to the Applicant

Mr Parrish was asked about the door people checking age proof in certain hours, what happened outside those hours? He explained that staff challenged people who looked underage. All incidents were logged onto the till system with reasons and this log was reviewed weekly by the management team. The company used mystery shoppers from an external company.

Mr Parrish was asked if there had been any incidents with the gambling machines. He explained that there had been no incidents with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.