A Stockport store has been barred from selling alcohol after it repeatedly failed to carry out proper age-checks and the owner tried to hide illegal cigarettes from officials.
Stockport council licence chiefs also heard how Drinks Allowed – trading as Go Local, in Castle Street, Edgeley – had failed to comply with conditions relating to the storage of CCTV footage. A report to the authority’s licensing sub-committee described boss Ashkay Singh Ahuja as demonstrating ‘complete disregard for the law’.
His solicitor, Kashiff Khan, said Mr Ahuja accepted there had been ‘shortfalls’ and the shop ‘needed to improve’, but pleaded for him to be given a second chance, adding the revocation of the licence would be ‘devastating’ for him. However, after hearing evidence from trading standards and the council’s licensing team, the three-strong panel decided the most severe penalty was warranted.
Chair Councillor Chris Gordon said there had been ‘significant repeated failures’ in compliance and it was therefore ’reasonable, balanced, appropriate and proportionate’ to revoke the licence.
The review was triggered after police and licensing chiefs visited the shop last August as part of national illicit tobacco disruption initiative Operation CeCe.
Officials did not initially discover any illicit items during a visit to the shop on August 25, 2021 – although the ‘young male’ left in charge of the store was not authorised or trained to sell alcohol.
But GMP later received reports regarding a car at the back of the premises.
The enforcement team returned to the shop, where Mr Ahuja identified himself as the owner.
Upon access to the vehicle, the team discovered and seized 400 illicit cigarettes, 2,050g of illicit hand rolling tobacco and 230 illegal vapes with a street value of approximately £1,500.
Go Local, in Edgeley, Stockport. (Photo: Google Street View via LDRS)
A report to the licensing committee said the items had been deliberately moved and hidden by him in an attempt to evade seizure by the enforcement team.
The panel also heard how there had been a series of complaints about under-age alcohol sales, ‘fake tobacco’ and opening outside the hours of its licence.
Mr Ahuja and his counsel claimed many may have been malicious, coming from – or been encouraged by – a business rival.
However, in May last year the shop was caught selling booze to a 19-year-old test-purchaser without checking ID.
Jenette Hicks told the committee how on the day of the hearing she had visited the shop and was again served by a member of staff who did not understand how to carry out an age verification check. They were also unable to provide CCTV footage from 28 days previous – something Mr Ahuja said was down to a technical fault.
Mr Khan said Mr Ahuja was in agreement that training and oversight needed to be improved. But he added there was a ‘complete denial he had ever sold cheap or counterfeit alcohol or tobacco’.
In respect of the items found in the car, Mr Ahuja claimed that the vapes were bought from a wholesaler in Manchester, while he had then bought the tobacco from a man who had approached him afterwards.
He said none of the items had been taken into the shop after being purchased and the tobacco was for his personal use and that of his family and colleagues.
Mr Khan argued the vapes were bought in good faith and an invoice for the sale was shown to the committee.
“My client is not washing his hands from anything,” he said. “He fully accepts his responsibility and fully accepts there have been shortfalls. But would that justify a full revocation? No.”
However, trading standards officer Melony Woods urged the panel to do just that.
“The illegal items found in Mr Ahuja’s vehicle had been hidden by him in an attempt to evade seizure. Is this the kind of person that should be trusted to sell alcohol in a residential area?
“We don’t think so on the evidence available to us.”
Ms Hicks added: “How many times do we have to visit before we get the improvements? How many times have we told him of the problems we have found and yet, today, we have still found non-compliance with licensing conditions?”
After retiring for some time for deliberations the licensing panel returned with a decision to remove the premises licence.
Cllr Gordon said there were ‘serious causes for concern’ and a lack of responsibility being taken by Mr Ahuja.
Mr Ahuja has 28 days to appeal the decision.
