A convenience store that was rocked by a terrifying ‘targeted attack’ has been granted a 24 hour alcohol licence despite concerns it would not be appropriate for the area.
Da Shop, in Cheadle Hulme, Stockport was the scene of what was understood to be a gang-related shooting in June 2021, leading to the arrest of a 15-year-old boy for attempted murder. The ‘bungled hit’ was swiftly followed by the arrest of a 16-year-old boy and a 19-year-old man.
The attack on the Worcester Road shop was foiled after a fogging device was activated by staff- although licensing chiefs heard four blanks were fired during the incident, including three in store and one at a passing motorist.
It was referred to in a council report to the authority’s licensing sub-committee, which recommended the application should be refused on the grounds it was not suitable for a residential area.
But Nick Semper, representing the applicant, said the incident should have no bearing on an application to sell alcohol and late night refreshments 24 hours a day.
He addressed the three-strong panel on behalf of Qaiser Mahmood, the licence holder and premises supervisor.
“Qaiser did not invite or in any way negligently contribute to this attack on his premises and, due to his excellent CCTV footage and his fog bandit, he and his staff foiled it safely, effectively and immediately,” said Mr Semper, of The Licensing Guys consultancy.
“To deny him a premises licence on those grounds would actually be an act of revictimisation – blaming him in some way for being a victim of crime and that would completely and utterly offend His Majesty’s government’s victim charter.”
The panel viewed CCTV footage of the incident in private before the hearing recommenced in public.
Mr Semper told the panel that three people were now on remand awaiting sentencing. Greater Manchester Police has not, to date, responded to a request from the Local Democracy Reporting Service for an update on this case.
The shop – which already opens from 5am to 1am – offers a late night delivery service via platforms such as Deliveroo. Mr Semper told panel this was especially valuable to older housebound people who may need emergency supplies or for families with children who need Calpol in the middle of the night.
He presented a 250-signature petition to the committee, stressing that those who had put their names to it had no issue with the saw Da Shop as offering a ‘useful and popular service’ to the community.
Mr Semper also reminded the committee that the application came with a ‘raft’ of conditions to mitigate concerns around public nuisance and crime and disorder – including the use of a smoke generating security device and CCTV system, with recorded retained for a period of 31 days.
And he told the panel that a new door magent lock was due to be fitted and early hours customers would only be let in once staff had viewed them through a doorbell camera.
“I now have to ask you to consider whether it’s likely that these premises, which have operated for years without any issue up until one o’ clock in the morning will suddenly become the congregating point for hordes of car door-slamming caterwauling people in the street outside?
“It doesn’t happen prior to one o’ clock so why should it suddenly start happening as the clock of All Parish Church, in Cheadle Hulme, chimes one?
But Ian O’Donnell, the council’s head of public safety and protection, said the council had a balance to strike between helping businesses and ‘ensuring that neighbourhoods are somewhere that people can live peacefully’.
While he accepted the additional conditions went some way to mitigating concerns, he said the fundamental problem of running a 24 hour off-licence in a residential area remained.
“We are not trying to stifle his business,” he said. “It seems a very good idea and Mr Mahmood has clearly marketed the business very well.
“It feels like it is a great idea but in the wrong area and the wrong location. If this was a discussion about an application for an industrial unit or an out-of-town site or somewhere where there were not residents then we would not be objecting to this.”
However, the panel, felt the representations against the application were not supported by sufficient evidence and the proposed conditions were largely sufficient to mitigate concerns in respect of pubic nuisance and crime and disorder.
The sub-committee voted by two to one that the extended licence should be granted.
