Update: Village pub's hours won't be cut following nuisance complaints

Update: The Swan in Iver will not face any limits to its opening hours - and certainly won't be forced to close - following complaints over noise and anti-social behaviour at its premises.

A debate over the future of a village pub fetched a fiery exchange of views on Thursday – with some decrying the activities there and others staunchly defending the pub.

Buckinghamshire's licensing sub-committee, whose job it is to review licences for pubs and suchlike, was brought in to sift through the complaints and decide what to do about them.

Eventually, the sub-committee decided not to cut The Swan’s opening hours or close it but instead to tighten the licence conditions to tackle noise and nuisance.

They mentioned that representations against the pub 'carried less weight' because many of them said they didn't want the pub to close down.

As the licence holder acknowledged there were problems at The Swan, his representative did suggest some conditions. But the sub-committee felt these did not go far enough.

However, they also felt that Environmental Health, the experts on noise nuisance, proposed ‘numerous’ amendments which ‘went too far’ and would have ‘severely restricted’ The Swan's ability to hold any events outside.

The conditions the committee landed on include:

- Doors and windows must stay shut during indoor entertainment

- Neighbours must be given 14 days’ notice before outdoor events

- No outdoor music after 9pm, except up to two Friday or Saturday events per month, which must stop by 11pm

- Garden closed to drinkers after 10pm Sun–Thu, and 11pm Fri–Sat (smoking only allowed after this).

- No 'offensive smells'

- Refuse and bottles only disposed of at quiet times

- Empty glasses collected regularly.

September 16: A debate over the future of a village pub fetched a fiery exchange of views on Thursday – with some decrying the anti-social behaviour there and others staunchly defending the pub.

The Swan, based the in Iver High Street, is a Grade II listed building that dates back to the 16th century. It has been operating for ‘hundreds of years’ with the support of the community.

But now it has faced a review of its premises licence ‘on the grounds of preventing public nuisance, crime and disorder, and [protecting] public safety’.

Such a review looks whether premises may keep its licence, should change it, or have it taken away.

Mr Ravneet Singh Lalia currently holds the licence – but before he did, an extra bar was installed in the kitchen without the correct permissions.

This opened it up to review and led to a flurry of responses on both sides.

During a licensing sub-committee on September 11, councillors and members of the public debated its merits and problems, with strong feelings on both sides.

Several neighbours showed up to complain about the ‘appalling’ and ‘very distressing’ noise nuisance caused by pub activities.

They described customers ‘smoking and drinking at all hours’ in close proximity to neighbouring property boundaries.

Others mentioned ‘excessively loud’ music, swearing and shouting, rubbish dropped on the ground or thrown over private fences, public urination, and the presence of children at the pub after 11pm.

More complaints arose out of a pool table that is unconventionally placed outside.

Some residents said an increasing proportion of the clientele ‘look dodgy’ and are not from the community.

They decried the fact that it had been a village pub for so long but was now seeing rowdy punters show up from out of town, causing problems that hadn’t been there before.

They felt that its commercial success had come at the expense of its neighbours, and it ‘needs to go back to the way it was before’.

Before this review application, records show there had been no formal complaints from the public since the licence was first granted in 2005.

At the meeting, residents disagreed on when problems began – the pool table, for example, had been there for about eight years, one person said.

Others painted a picture of more than 17 years of peace before problems began ‘suddenly’ occurring.

There were also 83 written representations in favour of the pub prior to the meeting.

This group was against any drastic changes to or suspension of the licence, saying villagers ‘would not be happy’ and ‘have nowhere else to go.’

There was also some confusion as to what was being asked for.

Neighbours insisted they were not asking for The Swan to be shut down – only for conditions put in place to protect the peace of neighbours.

But those defending it worried that the discussion was leading to a result that ‘threw the baby out with the bathwater’ and would lead to overly zealous restrictions being imposed.

For example, Matthew Phipps, representing The Swan, said the suggestion that all activity in the pub garden needs to stop by 9pm is ‘not reasonable.’

Simply imposing conditions relating to specific noise and other activities ‘does not let the premises off the hook,’ he argued.

“We are not shying away from the problems that have been caused… [and] we are sorry for them,” he said.

He said that, in the round, the pub has ‘a very good relationship with the community’.

The panel retired to consider its options.