Plans to open a new bingo and gaming centre in Hastings are set to go in front of councillors.

On Monday (December 1), a Hastings Borough Council licensing panel is due to consider an application from high street gambling chain Merkur Slots Ltd, which seeks a bingo premises licence for a property at 209 to 210 Queens Road.

As well as offering bingo games, the licence would permit the business to have an unlimited number of gaming machines on the premises, which could operate for up to 24 hours a day.

The majority of these gaming machines would not be able to have a maximum stake above £1 or a maximum payout above £100. But up to 20 per cent could be Category B3 machines, which can have a maximum stake of £2 and maximum payouts £500.

The hearing has been called in response to a single objection raised by The Godden Gaming Organisation; operator of Palace Amusements in White Rock and The Deluxe, a bingo hall and 24-hour gaming centre in Pelham Place.

In its objection, Godden claims Merkur Slots intends to create a “machine led environment” where bingo is not the “primary activity”. It also claims the venue’s “main function is to create as many category B3 machines as is possible.”

Godden argues national legislation and local licensing policies seek to resist the granting of bingo licences in such circumstances, as gaming machines are intended to be an “ancillary offer” for that type of premises.
It says the application should be rejected or else restricted with a number of additional conditions.

In a statement, the organisation’s commercial director Jordan Godden said: “Merkur Slots operated several other bingo licensed venues across the UK. Their bingo premises are solely for the purposes of benefitting from the machine allowance.”

He added: “The application is made for a bingo premises licence so as to allow for 24/7 hour opening for slot machines, and automated bingo. Whilst bingo will be provided at the premises, presumably electronically, this can only take place between the hours of 09:00 to 00:00. The machines are capable of being used 24/7.”

In a statement, counsel for Merkur Slots Sarah Le Fevre said: “[Merkur Slots UK Limited] has over 230 trading premises. Its sites are located across a very wide range of areas, geographically and socially. These are divided into adult gaming centres and bingo premises.

“Under the legislation, the gaming machine entitlement is identical in both, but in bingo premises there is an added opportunity to play bingo games on tablets and on paper.

“Therefore, in those premises in which the applicant wishes to offer bingo, it applies for a bingo premises licence rather than an adult gaming centre (AGC) licence. Conversely, in sites where it does not wish to offer bingo, it applies for an AGC licence.

“This is a premises where, in line with its existing bingo premises, and in line with Hasting Council’s Statement of Licensing Principles, it expects its bingo offering to be very popular indeed.”

In its objection, Godden also argues that Merkur Slots has failed to properly consider the “specific localised issues” in Hastings, in particular “the high rate of antisocial behaviour and crime recorded in the town centre.”

Similar concerns had seen the council refuse a planning application tied to the same premises. This planning application, refused last month, had sought permission for a change of use of the building from retail to an adult gaming centre.

In their reasons for refusal, council planning officers cited concerns around “the site’s location within an area of high deprivation” and said it would be “likely to have a detrimental impact on the health and wellbeing of residents and visitors in Castle Ward and the surrounding area.” These concerns echoed an objection raised by East Sussex County Council’s Public Health team.

Planning officers also had concerns around an “over-concentration of gambling establishments locally”.

This planning decision, which may be open to appeal, is not a matter for the licensing panel to consider, however, as it falls under a separate regulatory framework.

Ms Le Fevre disputes these concerns in her statement, saying the business operates in a range of localities including “areas experiencing high social deprivation and other social issues.”

She says “the systems, staff training, compliance monitoring and audit processes [employed by the business] are and are proven to be robust and effective to ensure the promotion of the licensing objectives across the estate.”

But, in its objection, Godden also says the business has “a proven record of failure to protect vulnerable persons from being harmed”, pointing to a financial penalty issued by the Gambling Commission in January this year.

According to the Gambling Commission’s website, an investigation found that Merkur Slots UK Limited had breached part of the Social Responsibility Code Provision, which falls under the commission’s standard licensing conditions. The breach related to part of the code which requires licencees to “interact with customers in a way which minimises the risk of customers experiencing harms associated with gambling.”

Ms Le Fevre acknowledges this incident in her statement, saying the financial penalty related to failures by staff to intervene in the gambling of one customer at one of the applicant’s premises in Stockport between the 1st and 3rd of November 2023.

But she goes on to note how the Gambling Commission had acknowledged “the failure was due to premises staff not implementing the policies and procedures effectively” and that the business had taken “remedial action to address this issue”.

Ms Le Fevre says this remedial action “extended far more widely and deeply than simple retraining of the staff involved” with the development of new policy and process across the applicant’s whole estate, which is “specifically targeted at the promotion [of] safer gambling and providing the very best assistance to its staff in promoting and ensuring safer and safest gambling.”

All interested parties will have the opportunity to state their case before the panel makes its decision. This decision will be open to appeal through the courts by any interested party.