Jump to content

Recommended Posts

fredricketts Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Make Mr Barber Right.

>

>

> I would like to object to the granting of a 24

> hour licence to the co-op at Lordship Lane SE22

> for the following reasons:

>

> 1. We already have too many outlets for 24 hour

> Intoxicating liquor licensing in Lordship Lane.

>


xxxxxx


Please read the whole thread.


THE CO-OP HAS NOT APPLIED FOR A 24 HOUR LICENCE TO SELL ALCOHOL!!!!!


And why James Barber has not come onto this thread to correct this misinformation he is putting about, I have no idea.


But unless he has a very good excuse, my opinion of him has plumeted.

Goose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So from this website (below) for application lodged on 27th Feb, open 24 hours but alcohol 0600-2300 (except Sunday).

>

> Has my support but what defines 'late night refreshment'


"Late night refreshment" is defined, in Schedule 2 of the Licensing Act 2003, as "hot food or hot drink" provided between 23:00 and 05:00. For that a licence is required. The schedule even states that hot drinks containing alcohol do not fall within its specific provisions. They'd presumably fall within a standard alcoholic drinks licence.


I've so far found no law specifying that any shop in Southwark requires permission or licence to be open 24 hours on any day other than Sunday. I don't know that the the statement within the licence application that it's intended to open for 24 hours a day imports anything beyond a wish to be clearly accurate and truthful. If anyone knows anything more about 24 hour opening where there's no provision of either alcohol or late night refreshment, please do contribute.

Oh dear.....only James Barber would publish the details of a variation of licence application and not read them properly. Or am I being too kind in not assuming he's up to his old tricks of misrepresenting the detail of an application?


Four pages later and James still hasn't acknowledged his error. Meanwhile, the licensing committee may just be wondering why they are receiving objections to the extension of an alcohol licence that hasn't been applied for!

Didn't James say they are extending alcohol license AND applying for 24/7?


Aren't both facts true?


Doesn't mean they are opening to sell alcohol 24/7


More personal abuse of a local elected representative (even if we disagree whth him or he gets his facts wrong) is just indicative of childish, petty minds.


I'm willing to bet he works a lot more than betsy vickers for example. I can let some typos pass. "Just sayin". Pathetic

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The Coop has applied to extend it current alcohol

> license and apply for a new one to enable it to

> open 24/7.

> This is possible under the Licencesing Act 2003.

>

I understood this to mean they want to open 24/7 and extend the time they can sell alcohol within that period. Who would be silly enough to think it meant they want to sell alcohol 24/7? That would have zero chance of being allowed I'm sure.

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Oh dear.....only James Barber would publish the

> details of a variation of licence application and

> not read them properly. Or am I being too kind in

> not assuming he's up to his old tricks of

> misrepresenting the detail of an application?

>

> Four pages later and James still hasn't

> acknowledged his error. Meanwhile, the licensing

> committee may just be wondering why they are

> receiving objections to the extension of an

> alcohol licence that hasn't been applied for!


They have actually applied for an extension. You would know that if you read the application. Are you going to say sorry?

Sue Wrote:


>

> THE CO-OP HAS NOT APPLIED FOR A 24 HOUR LICENCE

> TO SELL ALCOHOL!!!!!

>

> And why James Barber has not come onto this thread

> to correct this misinformation he is putting

> about, I have no idea.

>

> But unless he has a very good excuse, my opinion

> of him has plumeted.


Perhaps you can clarify where you feel misinformed before your opinion further plumetes?

@SJ...


Nope ...


This is how the opening post reads, as at 0700, Saturday 9th March.



The Coop has applied to extend it current alcohol license and apply for a new one to enable it to open 24/7.

This is possible under the Licencesing Act 2003.


This seems like a bad idea. It's one thing having a small corner shop open 24/7 which is likely ot just serve locals and the odd passing trade. We fear the Coop being open 24/7 will become a night time destination and have formally objected.


But what do you think?

If you think it's a good or bad idea please do tell council officials before the 27 March deadline.

Email [email protected] and cope me [email protected]


We don't want such a potentially big decision affecting East Dulwich Night Time Economy to be taken without as much local input as possible.


Sounds pretty unambiguous to me and a misreading of the application, whether deliberate or not.


I've edited my post above because, with hindsight, it was perhaps a tad cruel. So I'll stick to the main point. Seems to me JB has - deliberately or otherwise - misrepresented the application. As to whether JB works "a lot more" than I do, as you're willing to "bet" (FFS), then perhaps he needs to work "a lot more" on how he presents this (and other issues on which he evidently has a personal position) to the East Dulwich Forum.

They are only applying to extend the alcohol part by one hour from a 7am start to a 6am start....hardly any difference at all. Not quite the insinuation of extended hours into the night that has been inferred.


The main part of the variation is for late night refreshment. But can't really frighten a local populous with the night time sale of tea and coffee can we.


I suppose Alan that you would say James pre-Christmas inferrment that an application for change of use of a premise would probably lead to another chain supermarket is also in our imagination. James has a history of misrepresenting facts to seek support for his own agenda. There's more than enough evidence of that on EDF alone.

My view exactly Betsy.


Had James written instead 'The Coop has applied to extend it current alcohol license by one hour and apply for a new one to enable it to open for the sale of other goods 24/7' then it would read very differently. And had he written that, the following fours pages dedicated mainly to how bad the idea of 24/7 sale of alcohol might not have continued. At no point did James post again to correct those comments. Sue is the person that has pointed out the disproportion in the discussion (and rightly so).

The point is DJ that you said no extension was applied for and now you are saying well yes one has been applied for, but only a little one. So you posted misinformation. Something you can't accuse JB of.


JB attached the application to his post where the details are quite clear and asked people for their opinions having given his own. Just because there may or may not be 4 pages worth of the ramblings of idiots who couldn't be bothered to read the application is hardly JB's fault and more a reflection on those who incorrectly made an assumption.

Alan, there are plenty of examples of james being vague and deliberately misleading. Perhaps if he didn't have a history of it then people might be a bit more forgiving of the vagueness of his opening post. So I stand by my view and we'll have to agree to disagree yet again (funny how you rear your head as soon I as post though - a thread you seemingly had no interest in before).


Edited to add....James second post reads 'I don't think it's fair to say people living in areas that were quiet when they moved there, and if pre Tessa Jowell licensing 2003 law it wasnt legally possible to have late night bars and pub let alone 24/7 alcolhol sale, should move if they're unhappy rather than objecting.'


Now if that isn't connecting 24/7 sale of alcohol to the present debate then I really am the fool that James takes us all for.....

There is no single thing that has destroyed lives and the high street more than betting shops. I do not think the Islington High Street is riddled with them. How could any right minded adult have open pandora's box of evil except to think the poor need their pursuits. No different at all than Payday Loan companies helping the underclass through xmas.


I have a great respect for ... almost all your posts DJ but in this instance what are you on about?


Of course, it must be, that any discussion about the hight street can be connected to all discussions about the high street. Really there is a 1984 tendency to "thought police" on this forum with clear right to rule political overtones.


Please do not think I am taking "sides" on "Lordship Lane Co-op", I am not.

What have betting shops and payday loan companies got to do with a supermarket wanting to extend its opening hours (and ONLY to extend the hours during which it can sell booze by ONE hour, not, repeat NOT, to offer 24/7 off-licence facilities)? Jeez, Louise ... talk about missing the point!

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sue Wrote:

>

> >

> > THE CO-OP HAS NOT APPLIED FOR A 24 HOUR

> LICENCE

> > TO SELL ALCOHOL!!!!!

> >

> > And why James Barber has not come onto this

> thread

> > to correct this misinformation he is putting

> > about, I have no idea.

> >

> > But unless he has a very good excuse, my

> opinion

> > of him has plumeted.

>

> Perhaps you can clarify where you feel misinformed

> before your opinion further plumetes?


xxxxxx


Yes. James Barber said earlier something like "Effectively they can sell alcohol 24 hours". I think it is on the second page.


I will find and copy and paste the post, but I have a laptop problem at the moment.

Re: Lordship lane Co-op wants to open 24/7

Posted by James Barber March 05, 01:50PM


Hi worldwiser,

The Co op have appleid to extend existing licence from 6am-10pm to 5am-11pm and applied for a second licence to sell alcohol 11pm to 5am. Effectively they can sell 24hours.


xxxxxxx


The part in bold is incorrect so far as I can see, as the second part was for refreshments, which do not cover alcohol.


So basically, James posted correct information in his original post on this thread, but has subsequently muddied the water with incorrect information, which other people have now picked up on and are repeating the inaccuracy that the Co-Op are wanting to sell alcohol 24 hours, rather than just wanting to be open 24 hours.


With a tiny extension of an hour for alcohol sales in the morning.


So perhaps the person accusing me of accusing James Barber wrongly could apologise :)) :)) :))


Unless I turn out to be wrong, in which case I shall grovel :)) :)) :))

My point mynamehere is the same as Sue's above. That the extension of the alcohol licence is a red herring as it is only an extension of one hour, at the beginning of the day and will not change the hour at which the co-op stop selling alcohol each day. And that James B has deliberately mislead people by confusing that with premises that sell alcohol 24/7.


If there is a second application it should be up on the southwark site. I'll have a look.

With the number of people working into the evening in LL in the eating and drinking establishments, together with shift workers at e.g. Kings - the offer of extended opening for shops where you can get necessities (and a hot drink and snacks) seems like a very good idea which adds to the amenities of the area - or maybe these sort of people don't vote Lib Dem.


24/7 life marks a vibrant city - I don't want to live in a one pony burb where the only sign of life is the smoke rising from the (CPZ surrounded) crematorium.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • OOOOooooOOOooohhhHHHHHH 👜 👜 👜 
    • That's actually why the Sherlock Holmes stories were so popular. There was so little crime people found it exciting to imagine robberies and murders happening in London.
    • Yes, because of course there were no violent robberies in the olden days. Pretty much no crime happened at all I believe through the entire Victorian era.
    • Hi all, Im a Southwark council leaseholder and live downstairs in a ground floor flat, there is one flat above me, it's a house with individual front doors leading from the street into the shared pathway. My neighbour told me he has had a ring doorbell installed, no discussion as to how I would feel being on camera everytime I go in and out or in my front garden. I was told it's only for deliveries and doesn't record and only activates when pressed, however I don't know this and I feel really uncomfortable everytime I'm out in garden or on doorstep talking to people. Everytime I walk in/out, it lights up and in the eve it has a  infra red  light. Now I've read up that as he said its only for deliveries, he could set it so it only activates when pressed, however it activates with its motion sensor. Had he said to me about getting it installed, I could have had the opportunity to ask about it recording etc but nothing except it's being installed and when I arrived home it was there. I don't like being horrible to people however I feel I have not been considered in his decision and I feel very uncomfortable as, some times I have to stand on doorstep to get signal for my mobile and I really don't like the idea of being watched and listened to. Has anyone got any advice as I'm beginning to get angry as I've asked about it once and was told it only activates when pressed. I believe this is not true. I know southwark council say you need to ask permission to make sure the neighbours are OK with it, I don't really want to go down that road but I don't know how to approach the subject again. They also put a shed approx 3 foot from my back room window, these places are built so my window faces their rear garden and there upstairs window  faces mine. They said it's there temporarily, that was over a year ago and it does affect the light, plus I'm hoping to sell up soon and the view from window is mainly a dark brown shed. When I've mentioned this, I was told they have no where else to put it, whereas originally they said its only temporary, Also the floorboards above are bare and I get woke early morning and at night, the thudding is so bad my light shakes and window rattles, so I mentioned this and asked if they have rugs, I was told when they get the boards re sanded they will get rugs, I should have asked if they could get rugs and just take them up when boards being done, which I would have done had it been me living above someone, their attitude was I can just put up with it until they are ready. so they had the floor boards done, and the workmen was hammering screws, yes screws, in the floorboards, I spoke to workmen to ask how much longer and they said yes, are using screws to make less noise! I could hear the cordless screwdriver, not an issue but for every screw there were at least 8 whacks, the owners had gone out to avoid the noise  so I  spoke to workmen as the noise was unbearable, the sanding, not an issue at all, people need to get things done to their home and I'm fine that on occasions there will be temporary noise. now I have a nice crack on my bedroom ceiling, I mentioned this to owner but no response, he said there were alot of loose floorboards and it will be much better now, not so noisy, as though I don't know the difference between squeaking floor boards and thudding, and nothing was mentioned re the crack or that they now have rugs, which if it were me, I'd be trying to resolve the issue so we can get on with feeling happy in our homes. so I'm feeling it's a total lack of consideration. these places are old and Edwardian and I've lived here over 40 years, had 4 different neighbours and it's only now the noise of thudding is really bad and the people before had floorboards but nothing like this. As you can probably tell I'm really wound up and I don't want to end up exploding at them, I've always got on with neighbours and always said if there's a problem with my dog, pls let me know, always tell me, however I feel it's got to the point where I say something and I'm fobbed off. I know I should tell them but I'm angry, perhaps I should write them a letter. Any suggestions greatly appreciated and thank you for reading my rant. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...