Police call for the suspension of Carlton Lounge's premises licence after stabbing incident

 

Photo: Carlton Lounge

Following the stabbing outside the Carlton Lounge/Tiger Bay in Kingsbury on May18th the police have applied for the suspension of its licence.  A decision will be made by the Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Sub-Committee on Friday at 10am.

The police list a number of 'failings':

1) Police were called at 03:31 hours on Sunday 18th May 2025 by LAS - which had in turn received a 999 call from a man reporting a stabbing at Tiger Bay. On police and medic arrival, no casualty was present.

At 03:40 police had a call from a nurse at Northwick Park Hospital to report a man had come in with stab wounds.

 

2) CCTV shows a large-scale disorder immediately outside the venue from about 03:25 to 03:30, during which the victim received a stab wound and collapsed at the scene. He was taken to hospital by other people, before emergency services arrived. Estimated 20-25 people involved in the disorder.

 

3) There was no call from the venue staff or management to reports of the disorder, or anything else. Staff were present and witnessing events, and security personnel were involved in the disorder, in apparent attempts to separate people.

 

4) The suspect can be seen entering the venue at 02:00am, with others. There is no search of any of them, frisk, metal detector, wand or otherwise.

 

5) The suspect is later seen outside with a large knife, which was used in the disorder and appears to have been used to stab the victim, ultimately killing him (subject to pathology confirmation on cause of death).

 

6) Appears likely that the knife was in the suspect’s possession inside the venue.

 

7) Police body worn video (BWV) shows a manager telling an attending CID officer that the groups involved in the disorder had not been inside Tiger Bay before the disorder. This was untrue, as they had been and indeed most, if not all, of the people had come from inside Tiger Bay, some having been specifically ejected by the staff/security.

 

8) Police BWV shows the manager saying he thinks a bottle/bottles were involved. A customer approaches and says a knife was used and had been pulled out inside the venue. He was promptly ushered away by another manager/member of staff.

 

9) House to house enquiries revealed local residents complain there is frequently noisy anti-social behaviour from the venue.

 

Summary

 

This incident on 18 May 2025, constitutes serious crime and disorder, which has triggered this review. The Metropolitan Police have serious concerns that the premises management and staff members demonstrated a lack of control and failing to undertake pro-active searches. The staff initially indicated that the incident did not start in the venue and later retracted their statement, admitting that both groups were in fact inside the venue, where the altercation started.

 

Due to the ongoing criminal investigation, it is currently difficult to establish the full facts from a licensing perspective. However, from the information we have gathered so far, the Police have that the aforementioned points above demonstrate that the licensing objectives are not being upheld.

 

Police Recommendation – The Police request an immediate suspension of Carlton Lounge’s premises licence pending a full review due the level of seriousness of the incident.

 

There are many documents on the Agenda website many of which are are similar wording.  Below are an example of a comment for suspension and one in favour:

Dear Licensing Team,

 

Subject: Request for Confidentiality – Representation Regarding Carlton Lounge (Tiger Bay) I am submitting the attached representation in support of the review of the premises licence for Carlton Lounge (Tiger Bay), 232–234 Kingsbury Road, London, NW9 0BH.

 

Due to the serious nature of the incidents associated with this venue and the fear of potential retribution, I respectfully request that my personal details be withheld from the premises licence holder and any other parties not directly involved in the licensing authority’s internal process.

 

As a local resident, I am deeply concerned about the ongoing serious incidents linked to this venue, including criminal activity, anti-social behaviour, and consistent late-night disturbances. These have had a direct and damaging impact on the local community, creating a heightened sense of fear and unease among residents. There have been multiple occasions of violent disorder, noise nuisance, and other behaviours that clearly breach the licensing objectives—particularly those relating to the prevention of crime and disorder and the protection of public safety. The presence of this venue in its current state has significantly deteriorated the quality of life for people living nearby.

 

The fact that people feel unsafe speaking out should be of grave concern and further supports the need for urgent and decisive intervention.

 

I strongly urge Brent Council to consider revoking the premises licence or imposing stringent new conditions that will prioritise the safety, peace, and wellbeing of the community.

 

I understand that under the Licensing Act 2003, representations usually need to be attributed to named individuals. However, I ask that you exercise your discretion under your powers to protect the identity of persons who may be at risk, and treat this representation with the appropriate level of confidentiality

 

 -0-0-0-0-0-0-0-

 

My name is [] and I have dedicated 16 years to education, working as a [] across both primary and secondary schools. Now, as the [] and [] of based at [] in Brent, I continue my commitment to developing young people, instilling discipline, and providing opportunities through sport.

 

I am writing to express my full support for the premises licence held by Carlton Lounge (Tiger Bay), located at 232 - 234 Kingsbury Road, London, NW9 0BH.

 

Carlton Lounge has been a steadfast supporter of our []for the past seven years,  providing financial assistance that has directly benefited our  []. Their contributions have helped equip our young athletes with essential gear, allowing them to train, develop their skills, and build confidence in a structured and positive environment. Their sponsorship is not just about funding, it is about investing in young people, giving them opportunities to thrive both in sport and in life.

 

As someone who has personally overseen the development of young boxers within our programme, I can confidently say that Carlton Lounge has been a valued partner in supporting positive community initiatives. Their generosity has empowered children and young adults who may not otherwise have access to sporting opportunities, reinforcing the importance of teamwork, discipline, and self-belief.

 

Beyond their contributions to our [], Carlton Lounge has consistently demonstrated a commitment to operating responsibly as a licensed venue. Senior members from [] regularly attend Carlton Lounge for social sports events, and I can personally attest to the professional and well-managed environment they provide. We have never experienced or witnessed any antisocial behaviour linked to the premises, and the management team is proactive in ensuring a safe and welcoming space for their customers.

 

Carlton Lounge is more than just a hospitality venue, it is a place where people feel safe, supported, and valued. The team behind it is actively engaged in fostering community spirit. Their dedication to upholding licensing conditions, managing their establishment professionally, and supporting local initiatives speaks volumes about their role within our neighbourhood.

I firmly believe that the licensing authority should recognise the long-standing commitment of Carlton Lounge to compliance, community enrichment, and responsible venue management. Their contributions extend far beyond their premises, positively shaping the lives of young people and strengthening our local area.

Is your Buddleja ('Butterfly Bush') suffering an aphid attack? if so the RHS would like to hear from you.

 

There is an outbreak of aphids in Buddleja bushes in the UK and they appear to have come to Wembley. The above are in Saltcroft Close. The RHS is researching into the outbreak and would like you to make a short report, with photographs if possible, if you have an infected bush. See below:

 

Symptoms of aphids on buddleja

• Crinkled, puckered and curled leaves that can look diseased
• Pale or yellow patches
• Aphid colonies may be found on the underside of leaves
• Shed skins indicate that aphids were previously present

Have you seen aphids or aphid damage on buddleja plants?

As part of our scientific research, we would like to know where buddleja aphid damage has been seen. If you’ve seen symptoms on buddleja plants, please take photos of the upper and lower sides of the leaves to submit to our survey. Please submit your records via our aphids on buddleja survey here (expected time to complete survey = two minutes).

If you have active aphid colonies, we may follow up to see if you can send us a sample to further help with our research on this relatively new find.

Thank you to everyone who has submitted records so far. Discover other sightings you can report to help our research here.

Background and research

In 2023, the RHS Gardening Advice Service received 58 reports of buddleja plants showing unusual symptoms. Samples of leaves were sent to the Food and Environment Research Agency (FERA) for to be tested for viruses, but none were detected, meaning the symptoms were most likely caused by damage from aphids feeding on the leaves.

In 2024, 67 reports were received, with aphids being found on the plants in most cases. RHS entomologists worked with aphid experts at the Rothamsted Insect Survey to obtain a tentative identification of melon-cotton aphid (Aphis gossypii) from a sample of buddleja at RHS Wisley.

Melon-cotton aphid is a generalist, which means it’s able to feed on many plant types, but it has mostly been limited to glasshouses in the UK. Due to the spike in reports over the last two years, our scientists are calling for sightings to be submitted. Reporting any sightings of aphids on buddleja will help us better understand its distribution and make further identifications.

 

How to manage aphids on buddleja

Although the leaf symptoms can look alarming, aphids are unlikely to have a significant impact on your buddleja’s health and vigour, so can often be tolerated.

If you see aphids on the plant, advice on how to manage them can be found here.

Wembley Road closures & bus diversions on Sunday 15th June from 11am: Capital Summertime Ball

 

Refugee Week Film Programe at The Kiln, June 17th

 

UPDATE: MEETING POSTPONED UNTIL SEPTEMBER: What should be the Left's position on immigration? Public meeting June 17th

 

Kensal and Kilburn Better 2025 event

What Should Be the Left's Position on Immigration?

 

On Tuesday, 17 June, 7pm at St Lukes Church, Fernhead Road,  W9 3EH (Queens Park station)

 

Free tickets!

Please register for tickets on Eventbrite at link below

The Right and Far-Right are weaponising the issue of immigration. The Left too often either copies them or is silent. What are the options?

Socialists need to be unequivocal and bold in standing up for asylum seekers fleeing death and persecution. What should it say about economic migrants and what would a popular Left immigration policy look like?

Come and discuss with an excellent panel including Zoe Gardner, immigration campaigner and researcher, among others.

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/what-should-be-the-lefts-position-on-immigration-tickets-1395413402049

Brent Cabinet to close Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre on July 31st, ahead of listing decision

 

Blue marker GMH site: proposed hotel and housing Yellow marker: current Leisure Centre, proposed new centre  will be further south with Adult Learning Centre behind it

 

The twin unisys buildings
 

Artists' impression of the new leisure centre 

Brent Cabinet will be asked at the next cabinet meeting to rubber stamp the closure of Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre. This comes shortly after their eviction of a nursery from the site at short notice, as they clear the site for redevelopment.

The Leisure Centre could have stayed open for longer before the builders moved in,  but officers reject that option  because it is running at a loss and the state of the building would incur maintenance expenses.

 The closure date comes a month ahead of when the decision of the Secretary of State on the community bid to give the building listed status is expected/

Officers explain:

A plaque on the current Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre marks the achievements of the late Leonard Johnson, community activist and Chair of Harlesden Peoples Community Council, in creating this space. This will be retained and included in the new facility. The council will work with the community to ensure that this history is commemorated in the new development.

Harlesden People’s Community Council have commenced a Save Bridge Park Campaign and submitted listing applications to Historic England to place Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre and Technology House on the National Heritage List for England. The developer, Stonebridge Redevelopment Estate Development (SRED has also submitted Certificate of Immunity (CoI) from listed status for the same buildings and their Unisys site.

Historic England will consider the applications and compile a report for the consideration of the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. It is anticipated that a decision on the CoI and listing applications will be made in the summer 2025.

The main purpose of listing Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre and Technology House is to protect the buildings and their surroundings from changes which materially alter the buildings or their setting. Once a building is listed, listed building consent may be needed, in addition to any potential need for planning permission, for works and alterations to the buildings, and breaches of the listed building regime are subject to criminal penalties and enforcement action.

So, depending on the decisions of Historic England and the Secretary of State, it may not all be plain sailing.

Another issue is the viability of the project with General Mediterranean Holding, the international parent company, controlled by the Auchi family, expecting a return on their investment. 'Viability' raises its head, especially as the land sale to GMH is expected to  fund the new leisure centre that Brent Council will build.

The Cabinet Report notes a proposal to double the number of homes on the site from 500 to 1,000. The GMH website says it will include affordable homes but stand by for a revision of that:

 

Conditional Land Sale Agreement

In June 2017, the Cabinet approved a Conditional Land Sale Agreement (CLSA) with GMH and to complete the CLSA, the following conditions need to be achieved:

• Planning: For the developer to achieve outline Planning Consent for the Bridge Park Masterplan

• Financial Viability: For the developer to achieve a profit and for Brent to fund the capital construction of a new leisure centre from the land sale proceeds.

• Vacant Possession: For Brent to acquire the Car Breakers Yard, either via private treaty purchase or CPO proceedings. It should be noted that the Council purchased the Car Breakers Yard in February 2019 via private treaty purchase.

At the signing of the CLSA, the Council and GMH envisaged the delivery of a Bridge Park Masterplan, which comprised a new hotel, a modern leisure centre and approximately 500 new homes.

 In February 2019, and following public consultation, Cabinet approved proposals to optimise the development potential of the site by enhancing the leisure provision, incorporating additional community facilities, enterprise space and supported living accommodation.

Given that the new leisure provision is to be funded from the sale proceeds, GMH sought to optimise the quantum of housing that can be delivered on their part of the development site. The change to the CLSA would have provided “at least 500 apartments/townhouses.” Since the agreed change, the council and GMH have been working to maximise the site even further and the current proposals is to include:

·    Approximately 1,000 homes to meet the needs of Brent’s growing population

·      Modern flexible community facilities

·      A better environment and public realm

·      A new permanent home for Brent Start, the council’s adult education service

·      Enhanced leisure provision

·      A hotel with a restaurant.

An Equality Assessment demonstrates the impact of closure on current users and the local community:

Sport England’s Active Lives survey identifies a number of target groups which are underrepresented in terms of participation in sport and physical activity. The nationally identified under-represented groups are young people, women and girls, people with disabilities, over 45s and black and minority ethnic groups.

Analysis of the available data in relation to the impact on the different protected characteristic groups shows that closing the Centre may have a negative impact on Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups as a greater proportion of users are from the broad black group – Black Somali, Black Caribbean and Black African. Closing the centre may also have a negative impact on people with disabilities, as there is a targeted session for young people on a Saturday.

There may be a negative impact on the older population as they may find it more difficult to travel to alternative provision.

 Closing the centre could have a negative impact on the five faith groups who hire the Centre on a regular basis for a total of 12 hours per week. Attendance across the 5 groups varies between 217 and 339 per week.

 I estimate that if the development goes ahead, based on the timetable above the new leisure centre is unlike to open before 2028/29 at the earliest. That means unavailability for possibly 4 years or more.

Have no fear, Brent Council suggests alternatives, albeit likely to be more expensive than Bridge Park:

Whilst closure of the Centre will result in the temporary loss of this leisure service and of spaces that can be hired, alternative spaces exist nearby. These include Willesden Sports Centre, Vale Farm Sports Centre, Wembley Leisure Centre, Moberly Sports Centre, various community facilities, schools, faith facilities and private gyms. These alternative facilities are well served by public transport from the Stonebridge area.

And if you have little money:

Brent Council Public Health have a wide range of opportunities for residents to be physically active with over 70 free sessions running each week. These include Walking for Health sessions at six of our parks, instructor led sessions at 20 outdoor gyms, six weekly sessions with Sport in Mind to support mental wellbeing, Our Parks sessions in Brent parks and libraries, Steady and Stable falls prevention class for those over 50 years, Couch to 5k, parkrun, community based sessions such as Zumba and Bollywood dancing and sessions for vulnerable residents.

 The Cabinet report offers recognition of the contribution of the Black community in the new building:

The council also acknowledges that Bridge Park has played an important role in the Stonebridge community for many years. Bridge Park is an important chapter in Black British history and the community’s achievements in creating this space in the 1980’s to empower local black residents. The council recognises the importance of working with the community to ensure this history is commemorated within the new facilities. We will work closely with the Libraries, Arts and Heritage Team to explore how best to recognise the legacy and contribution that Bridge Park had in Black British History. For example, working with local groups, organisations and individuals, this might be a photo exhibition showing the development of the community centre from a bus garage through to today and a mural on the hoardings of the development site to reflect the history.

The closure will mean loss of jobs for some at least of the Bridge Park employees.

The Cabinet report notes:

There are 11 permanent employees (seven full time and four part time) and six group exercise instructors. These staff are at risk of redundancy. There will be some redundancy costs depending on the number of staff that are not redeployed. The maximum cost for redundancies will be £90k based on calculations provided by Human Resources colleagues in May 2025. There will also be Pension Strain costs of £88k for two members of staff for early release of pension.

Just a word about the companies involved. As mentioned above, General Mediterranean Holdings is an international company controlled by the Auchi family. 

Stonebridge Real Estate Development is a UK subsidiary. Mohammad Al-Miqdadi  listed on January 1st 2025 as 'a person with significant control' of SRED: These are the latest accounts  (2023) I can find:

 

Mohammed Al-Miqdadi is also a board member of the Egyptian-British Chamber of Commerce and director of Tucan Investments and Kenton Holdings Ltd.

 Brent Council provides a comparison of the offer at the current lesiure centre and the proposed new facilities:

 With new adult provision at the site, the issue of 1 Morland Gardens (Altamira) and its preservation, is an issue that has been much discussed on this blog.

The Altamira Villa, Stonebridge (Picture: Willesden Local History Society) 

Officers note:

For Morland Gardens, there was also a petition requesting that the locally listed Altamira Building should not be demolished as part of development plans for the site. 251 people had signed the petition.

 A decision on the demolition or retention of this building will be subject to a future Cabinet report after the necessary design, site investigation works and viability assessments are undertaken. 

Proposals would also be subject to a planning application which would also consider the appropriate planning and heritage considerations.

 

 

A threat to the patchwork of small green spaces in Metroland?

 

Purple marks the green space. Note greenery opposite 

 Part of the green space and the side wall of 125 Preston Road

 

The proposed house on the corner of Preston Road and Pellatt Road

 

The proposed house from Pellat Road

 Preston is a Wembley area of 1930s semi-detached houses benefitting from many small green spaces: verges, corner plots and roundabouts. This gives the well laid out roads a unique character.

The alarm is being raised by residents that such spaces could be threatened if a planning application to build on one, lodged with Brent Council, succeeds.

The wide grass verge on the corner of Preston Road and Pellat Road has somehow ended up in private hands and the owner wants to build a 3 bedroomed house there.

I am not sure how to interpret the following extract from the deeds of 125 Preston Road and whether it contains any protections for the adjoining land. The residents of 125 Preston Road are opposing the application.

 

Objection from 125 Preston Road:

I write to object in the strongest terms to planning application 25/1246 for the proposed construction of a two-storey, three-bedroom dwelling directly adjoining my house 125 Preston Road. I submit this objection based on the following material planning considerations:

Overdevelopment and Inappropriate Layout

The proposed scheme represents an excessive and over-intensive use of a narrow and constrained wedge-shaped corner plot. It stretches the full depth of the site and includes a 6m rear projection along the boundary with 125 Preston Road-double the allowance permitted under Brent's Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD for semi-detached properties.

This fundamentally alters the spatial relationship of the existing pair of semis by eliminating the gap and unbalancing the pair. It converts No. 125 into an end-of-terrace structure in a location dominated by semi-detached homes with generous spacing. The resulting layout is cramped, disruptive to the established suburban rhythm, and incompatible with the original form and character of Preston Road.

Scale, Height, Visual Intrusion, and Daylight Impact

The scale and bulk of the proposed dwelling-particularly its flat, monolithic two-storey form and oversized rear element-are disproportionate to neighbouring properties. The massing extends beyond typical building lines and introduces visual intrusion from the street and adjacent homes. It severely impacts daylight, sunlight, and the open outlook from No. 125, and would dominate rear garden views.

The proposed development also breaches the 45-degree rule in relation to a ground-floor habitable window on the rear/side elevation of 125 Preston Road, which sits directly adjacent to the boundary where the 6-metre rear extension of the proposed dwelling is planned. Although only a single storey in height, the scale, depth, and proximity of this extension would severely restrict daylight to the affected window and create a pronounced sense of enclosure. The extension falls well within the 45-degree sightline, which is a standard Brent Council uses-under SPD1 and the Residential Extensions & Alterations SPD-to assess daylight and outlook impacts. The lack of a daylight/sunlight assessment to justify this massing is a notable omission and reinforces non-compliance with Policy DMP1, which requires protection of neighbouring amenity. This extension would result in material harm to the light, aspect, and enjoyment of No. 125.

Most of the comments on Brent Planning Portal are against the proposal but one person supports:

I do agree the green is nice but we need more housing in local communities and not high rise buildings taking over. 

There are plenty of parks around to enjoy the green of nature.

It seems to be an East facing house, guessing this wouldn't block the sunlight too much.

Overall I like the front garden proposal and generally the house has a new type of concept which am willing to adapt to.

I would say it is an improvement to seeing just a flat side of a house.

 Another respondent states:

If the land is part of the adjoining house, I have no objection but if the land is an empty green space, I strongly object to all these areas being snapped up for building projects.

Someobe suggests a Council investigation:

I was horrified when I saw this planning application. I know the site and it is no greater than a grass verge, originally the public walkway to some fields and now to some housing. How could one build on a grass verge in a corner as it is not even a real parcel of land? It will restrict access to parents with children and people needing support when disabled. When did this public walkway become a personal property and what due diligence was there for its sale? This beggars belief and the Council should investigate this transaction.

Furthermore, this area of Wembley has a unique character with housing in keeping with its community feel. This uncharacteristic new building will be a carbuncle and completely out of touch with the local aesthetic.

 This contribution sums up the issues:

 

Although I am not a direct neighbour, I am concerned about the broader implications this proposal may have on Brent's townscape, the integrity of local planning policies, and the overall quality of development in such a prominent and visible location. My objections are based on the following points:

1. Prominent and Sensitive Location 

This site occupies a highly visible corner at the intersection of Preston Road and Pellatt Road, a gateway route frequently used by residents, visitors, and tourists heading to Wembley Stadium. The existing green space here provides a valuable visual break in an otherwise densely built environment. Replacing it with a bulky, flat-roofed building would permanently alter the character of this area for the worse.

2. Poor Design and Incongruous Materials 

The proposed design is at odds with the surrounding Metroland-style housing. While neighbouring properties feature red brick, white render, pitched tiled roofs, and traditional detailing, this proposal introduces pale bricks, lime slurry coating, and an angular minimalist design with a flat roof. This stark contrast undermines Brent's design guidance, notably SPD1 and Policy BD1 of the Local Plan, which stress the importance of sensitive, high-quality design that complements its context.

3. Non-compliance with Key Planning Policies 

This application appears to breach several local and regional planning policies:

* Brent Local Plan Policy BD1: The proposal fails to reinforce local character.
* Policy DMP1: The development does not sufficiently protect neighbour amenity or respond appropriately to its setting.
* SPD1: This policy discourages "terracing" on corner plots and calls for new buildings to respect traditional roof forms, materials, and building lines.
* London Plan Policy D4: The design fails to integrate effectively with its surroundings, introducing an out-of-place structure in a highly visible location.

4. Risk of Setting a Harmful Precedent 

If approved, this application could set a disastrous precedent for similar developments on corner plots throughout Brent, particularly those that compromise garden space, architectural harmony, and the overall character of the area.

In conclusion, this proposal represents a poorly conceived design that does not respect the local character of the area, violates several planning policies, and risks undermining the quality of development in Brent. I strongly urge the Council to reject application 25/1246 in the interest of maintaining good design principles and preserving the borough's urban integrity.

The application has not yet been tabled at Planning Committee and could be delegated to a planning officer if there are few objections fom residents or councillors.