To consider an application for the review of a Street Trading Consent for the pitch located outside Clarks on Broad Street, Reading.

The Sub-Committee considered a report on an application by Reading Borough Council Licensing Team to review the Street Trading Consent in respect of the pitch located outside Clarks, 105 Broad Street, Reading.

The report stated that the application for a review of the premise licence had been submitted by the Licensing Team due to a failure by the consent holder to avail themselves to a reasonable extent of the street trading consent they had been granted.

The Sub-Committee heard that upon the renewal of Mr Alami’s street trading consent in 2023, a representation from Mr Robert Smalley, Reading Borough Council Licensing Enforcement Officer had been received and a hearing held on 28 November 2023. Mr Smalley stated that the consent should not be renewed due to the failure of Mr Alami to avail himself to a reasonable extent of the street trading consent. The Sub-Committee had decided to grant the application for the renewal of the Street Trading Consent for the sale of ‘Juices, Smoothies, Slushies, Shakes, Cakes and Hot Food and Drink not specifically listed on any existing street trading consent/licence previously granted by Reading Borough Council’. The minutes from this hearing were attached to the report as Appendix TS-1.

Mr Smalley’s request for a Review was attached at Appendix TS-2, and focused on Mr Alami’s continued failure to avail himself to a reasonable extent of the street trading consent, including details of 41 days during the period December 2024 to 6 May 2025 when Mr Alami was not seen to be trading. A copy of the current Street Trading Consent, amended at Mr Alami’s request upon renewal in October 2024, was attached at Appendix TS-3. This permitted the sale of “Burgers, Loaded Fries, Jacket Potatoes, Slushies, Lemonade, Mango Lassi, Hot Food and Drink, not specifically listed on any existing street trading licence/consent previously granted by Reading Borough Council”. Photographs of the pitch location and trading unit were attached as Appendices TS-4 and TS-5 respectively.

During the 28-day consultation period, no representations had been received from the consent holder. Following the circulation of the agenda, additional information submitted by Victor Graham on Mr Alami’s behalf had been received and circulated to members of the Sub-Committee and to all relevant parties.

The report also explained that the Licensing authority, when determining an application for the review of a street trading consent may:

• Take no action
• Vary the times, conditions and goods to be sold
• Revoke the consent

The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 was the legislation that governed Street Trading outside London. Schedule 4, paragraph 7, sub-paragraph 6 of the Act stated:

The council may at any time vary the conditions of a street trading consent.

Schedule 4, paragraph 7, sub-paragraph 10 of the Act stated:

A street trading consent may be granted for any period not exceeding 12 months but may be revoked at any time.

Schedule 4, Paragraph 9, sub-paragraph 5 of the Act stated:

Where a consent is surrendered or revoked, the council shall remit or refund, as they consider appropriate, the whole or a part of any fee paid for the grant or renewal of the consent.

Robert Smalley, Licensing Enforcement Officer, Reading Borough Council attended the meeting, addressed the Sub-Committee on the representation he had submitted and asked and responded to questions.

Salim Alimi, the Street Trading Consent Holder was present at the meeting, addressed the Sub-Committee and asked and answered questions.

Tabitha Shaw, Licensing Enforcement Officer, Reading Borough Council, presented the report to the Sub-Committee.

Resolved –

(1)           That, having considered Schedule 4 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982, each member of the Sub-Committee had read and considered the report from the Reading Borough Council Licensing team and the written representations from the respondent Mr Alami, dated 26.06.25, the Street Trader Consent previously granted to Mr Alami be revoked with effect from 17 July 2025.

(2)           That the Sub-Committee’s reasons be noted as follows:

(a)           The Sub-Committee had carefully considered all of the written and oral evidence presented to it.

(b)           The Sub-Committee noted that this was a street trading consent, and not a licence, which was under consideration.

(c)           The Sub-Committee noted that Mr Alami had a notably worse record of attendance and trading at his pitch, than all of the other Reading Borough Council consent holders, over the last four years.

(d)           The Sub-Committee noted that, at the review hearing on 28 November 2023, Mr Alami had made an undertaking that he would regularly be present and trading during the usual working hours (pages 2 and 3 of Appendix TS-1).

(e)           The Sub-Committee accepted that Mr Alami had been written to by email on 12 February 2025, asking him for an explanation for his repeated absence from his pitch since the renewal of his street trading consent, and warning him that he should be present more frequently. No explanation had been received.

(f)             The Sub-Committee accepted that after this warning, Mr Alami was not present and trading on 45 occasions, at times when he could have been expected to be present and trading, as set out at Appendix RS-3 to the Review Application Form.

(g)           The Sub-Committee noted that there was agreement that Mr Alami had been trading consistently, since he had been given notice of this hearing six weeks ago.

(h)           The Sub-Committee noted that Mr Alami had given a commitment to trade regularly through the Summer but repeated that he was not set up to trade through the Winter. He agreed that he had not yet invested in an alternative trailer since the grant of this latest consent in November 2024, and his current trailer was not compatible with selling hot food. The requirement to find a new, aesthetically-acceptable trailer, was not the reason for his failure to trade.

(i)             The Sub-Committee did not accept that Reading Borough Council had given Mr Alami worse treatment than other consent holders and rejected the suggestion that he had been discriminated against.

(j)             The Sub-Committee did not consider that Mr Alami’s explanation, sent by email on 26 June 2025 and delivered orally at the hearing, amounted to a reasonable excuse for his failure to avail himself of the consent, to a reasonable extent.

(k)           The street trading consent was therefore revoked.