Harringay online

Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

Another betting shop planned on Lordship Lane please help

Morning all,

We have just found out that Paddy Power wants to open a betting shop in the recently closed pub on Lordship (606 Lordship Lane N22 5JH)  about 5-7 minutes walk from Wood Green tube station. I live locally and am totally outraged as there are already 2 betting shops within 30 seconds walk of that old pub - a William Hill and Ladbrokes.

There is a sign on the door saying Paddy Power has submitted an application under the Gambling Act 2005 and that any representations need to be made in writing to the licensing authorities by 25th March.

I know similar situations have cropped up on Green Lanes and some of you have been active in fighting it - I would like your advice on how to stop this! I am planning writing to local councilors and MPs and will start a petition .

How can it be allowed to have three in such a short stretch of street - the noise and rubbish these places produce is terrible? 

Please sign the petition here: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/not-another-betting-shop-on-lord...

Thanks for your support!

Katie 


Tags for Forum Posts: betting, petition, shop

Views: 3040

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by tulips on March 4, 2014 at 10:39

I've signed your petition. I'm fed up of betting shops too!

Permalink Reply by Philip on March 4, 2014 at 11:51

Please keep us updated. I hate betting shops with fury as they suck the life out of our community.

Permalink Reply by JAC on March 4, 2014 at 13:11

Could not agree more!  signed up!

erno72Permalink Reply by erno72 on March 4, 2014 at 13:46

Hi Katie

I've signed, and passed your petition on to friends, let me know if you want any help with the campaign. 

Thanks

Alison

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on March 4, 2014 at 14:05

Katie, agreed and signed.

I was a small part of the group that fought successfully against Paddy Power's application for gambling premises licence near Seven Sisters tube station, in the Everybody's Music shop. But there was an important but:

That application involved a change of use (in planning terms). That was really the only reason the Objectors' case prevailed at the Planning Inspector stage (the gambling companies have plenty of cash at their disposal for Appeals).

Unless Paddy Power's application on the pub site involves such a change of use (and it sounds like it could) then you have little chance. The last government's Gambling Act 2005 contained a clause in respect of gambling premises licences, that the licencing authority must "aim to permit" [applications].

Having saturation betting shops is just dandy in terms of that government's Act: from the time that Act came into effect neither courts, councils nor communities could stop the oil slick of betting shops: the only limitation would be market demand.

I would cite that Act and the circumstances that led to it, as being evidence that the New Labour period is one of most right wing administrations we've seen in modern times. Their Act was extraordinarily friendly to the gambling industry lobby; that Party's funding by the bet365 operation is covered elsewhere.

To summarise: thanks to the Act, asserting that there are too many betting shops will cut on ice; if it does involve a planning Change-of-Use, then you may have a chance.

Disclosure:
am a prospective councillor candidate

Highgate Ward | Liberal Democrat Party

Permalink Reply by Philip on March 4, 2014 at 14:18

Sadly true points, Clive. I was in a campaign against one in Muswell Hill where the planning inspector just more or less said he was powerless to prevent it despite the negative effect on the community. As someone who knows people whose lives have been blighted by gambling I would love to get rid of them all.You are right to criticise Labour who even promoted Super Casinos. However the Coalition have done the same and protected the Gambling Industry from ANY restriction, so when you can point to the Libdems being any better.......

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on March 4, 2014 at 16:00

Philip,

Above, "will cut on ice" should be "will cut no ice", of course. I have forwarded the petition link to others.

The Campaign for Fairer Gambling is a useful link.

The super-gambling-friendly former national administration had its counterpart here at at the local level. At least one Cabinet Member, whose identity is known, advocated a casino at our Charity, Alexandra Palace. We know this because he presented a formal paper on the subject to his colleagues (at that point a majority of the cabinet rejected the proposal).

There remains silence as to how the clause promising the council's permission for a casino, made it into the final agreed Lease to Firoka. That Lease was exposed in the High Court.

The Lease had been signed and sealed by the Mayor and Burgesses of LBH. That, and other "user" clauses, would be in force today, were it not for a member of the public underwriting the High Court action.

Disclosure:
am a prospective councillor candidate

Highgate Ward | Liberal Democrat Party

Permalink Reply by Sarah_24 on March 12, 2014 at 14:55

Hi Clive,

How successful was this? Paddy Power is most definitely right beside Seven Sisters tube...it's at the bottom of West Green Road right next door to Costa.

I've signed the petition too katie.

Permalink Reply by pamish on March 12, 2014 at 15:49

That branch of PPower is a quarter the size of what they were  after, they wanted the site that is now the Costa. There was a fight for that and they lost, I think mostly on the grounds that it is a conspicuous spot between the transport hub and the college. DLammy was involved.  So it's worth objecting. 

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on March 12, 2014 at 17:40

Pam's right.

I played a small part in that fight, organised by Dougie Williams (Find Your Voice).

The site they occupy now wouldn't have required a change of use and it isn't as prominent as the big corner site they had wanted. Normally, without a change of use, betting shops can out-bid normal commerce: they carry and handle no stock, have few overheads and the four (always the maximum four) fixed odds betting terminals are outrageously profitable.

Those four FOBT's per premises have more in common with a (industrial-strength) casino than with a traditional horse racing bookies.

Permalink Reply by Sarah_24 on March 13, 2014 at 15:59

Thanks for the information and for the fight you put up!

I didn't even know about it until it opened but if we had to have yet another bl**dy betting shop I'm glad it is a quarter of the size that they wanted although would have been preferable to have none at all of course.

Permalink Reply by Katie Tucker on March 4, 2014 at 16:49

Thanks everyone for all your support - i will study the change of use aspect carefully to see whether it can apply here. Please keep forwarding so we get some momentum behind the petition many thanks again

RSS

Advertising

© 2024   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service