Sussex Police want a Brighton corner shop to lose its alcohol licence for 8 weeks, and a council licensing panel will decide on Wednesday 4 November 2026 at 10.00am.
The shop is Corner News & Booze at 178C Ditchling Road, also known as Best Deal Convenience Store. Police say repeated checks since October 2025 found breaches of its licence conditions and a failed under-age test purchase. Three residents and the council’s own licensing team have also written in. The council papers we have read do not include a written response from the shop.
Here is what police allege, what they are asking for, what residents say, and what the panel can do.
The review in key facts
Sussex Police applied on 16 September 2026 for a review of the shop’s premises licence. The licence allows alcohol to be sold for drinking away from the shop, and the shop can open, every day from 6am to 4am.
Police say two licensing objectives are being seriously undermined: preventing crime and disorder and protecting children from harm. The shop is in the Hollingdean and Fiveways ward, which police describe as a residential area popular with students, near London Road station and Lewes Road.
What police say they found first
The papers say the shop came to the attention of police licensing on 5 September 2025, when officers trying to collect CCTV for an investigation found the staff member could not download it. Police describe the footage they saw as of poor quality. A full licence check was then planned.
31 October 2025. Officers visited at 10.50pm on Halloween. Police say the CCTV clock was an hour out, and that two customers who looked under 25, aged 20 and 21, were served without being asked for ID. The refusals book had only 6 entries for the whole of 2025, including two that the officer watched staff record that night. Staff did refuse two sales on the evening, one to a man police describe as intoxicated, but the report says they looked to the officer to ask whether to serve. A breach letter followed on 14 December 2025, and a hard copy was handed in on 2 January 2026.
21 January 2026. A 20 year old test purchaser bought a bottle of lager without being asked for ID. Police say the member of staff who served him said the customer looked over 18 and mentioned a beard. A full check the same day found, according to police, that staff could not operate the CCTV, that the refusals register had one entry in nearly three months, and that small clear bags, pipes and grinders were on sale at the counter. Police say stocking those items does not promote the prevention of crime and disorder.
The shop changed its conditions, then police checked again
On 19 March 2026 the licence holder met police licensing officers, who proposed new conditions. He applied for a minor variation on 7 April and it was granted on 24 April 2026. Police describe his response as positive and say he asked for help with the application. They gave the shop three months to put the new conditions in place.
What police say they found in July and September
22 July 2026. Police say the member of staff present, who said he had worked there for a long time, could not operate the CCTV and told the officer he had not received any alcohol training or signed a training record. A breach letter on 1 August warned that a review was being considered.
3 September 2026. Police say the member of staff who served the test purchase in January was working again, although officers had been told he had left. He could not operate the CCTV, and the incident log and refusals register had not been signed off by the designated premises supervisor since 21 July. The refusals register did show 14 entries since that date. Police also say the layout did not match the licence plan, with open shelves of red wine where the plan shows a locked beer and wine fridge.
On 6 September the licence holder emailed an explanation and photos of a written authorisation for alcohol sales and four training records. Police say the records did not show the member of staff concerned. They say they have lost confidence in the shop as a responsible operator and moved to a review, although they accept the licence holder has been willing to work with them.
What police are asking the panel to do
Police are not asking for the licence to be revoked. They say the shop only holds a licence to sell alcohol, so there is no other activity to remove, and they have no evidence the opening hours themselves are causing harm. They say this case is about compliance. They ask for four steps.
“This is not intended to take away [the licence holder’s] livelihood but to ensure that improvements are made, conditions adhered to and that ultimately, the licensing objectives are being actively promoted and upheld.”
Sussex Police review application, 16 September 2026
A yellow card is a first-step warning. Police point to the annex of the council’s licensing policy on problem premises on probation.
What residents and the council say
The panel received three representations supporting the shop from local residents, sent between 4 and 12 October 2026. Each is on the ground of protecting children from harm. The papers do not name them.
The residents say they have known the shop for between about 11 and 13 years. They say staff challenge under age customers, refuse sales and check ID, treat children, elderly and vulnerable customers with care, and that many neighbours in nearby tower blocks rely on it. One says children from four schools use it.
The council’s licensing team, acting as a responsible authority, also sent a representation. It fully supports the police application on both grounds.
What happens next and what we do not know
What the panel can do. The panel can modify the licence conditions, exclude a licensable activity, remove the designated premises supervisor, suspend the licence for up to three months, or revoke it. If it does not decide at the hearing, it must decide within five working days, and a decision does not take effect until the appeal period has passed or any appeal is settled.
The shop’s side. The papers we read include the police application and the representations. We have not seen a formal written response from the licence holder, and the exhibits bundle sent with the police application (Appendix B1) was not reviewed. The licence holder may give evidence at the hearing.
The outcome. The decision had not been published when we wrote this.
For more licensing hearings this month, read our reports on the Taco Bell London Road bid and the Sushi Co Western Road licence.
ImJustBrighton note: everything above comes from the Brighton and Hove City Council Licensing Panel papers for 4 November 2026. The police statements are allegations that the panel has yet to test, and the residents’ views are theirs.
Comments
No comments yet. Start the conversation.