Croydon (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Croydon Mayor to take legal action against a controversial vape shop owner accused of repeatedly obstructing pavements with cargo stacks, sparking complaints.
This long-awaited action is a part of the borough’s “crackdown” on antisocial behaviour by Croydon Council.
Following several complaints from locals, Croydon Mayor Jason Perry said on his official Facebook page that the proprietor of Vape and Mobile on Selsdon Road will be prosecuted.
“We’re cracking down on antisocial behaviour in Croydon,”
Mr Perry stated in his post.
“This includes prosecuting the owner of Vape and Mobile after residents complained about antisocial behaviour, including deliveries blocking the pavement for long periods. The case will be in court later this month.”
Earlier last year, the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) published an exclusive research that brought attention to the problem of vape and mobile.
The store has seen a lot of deliveries blocking the pavement, making it an eyesore and giving pedestrians little room to move around, which infuriated the locals.
One elderly South Croydon resident named Mary said: “It just looks ugly, doesn’t it, seeing them all stacked up like that.”
Despite this, Mr Patel, the owner of Vape and Mobile, strongly defended the shop’s operations in response to the complaints.
He said: “We are running a business, and we contribute more revenue than all of these shops have done in their lifetime. What is their issue?”
He also said how his business was a ‘success story’ while other shops were closing up throughout Croydon.
The firm may first receive warning notices from the council telling them to clear any obstacles.
Depending on how serious the blockage is, the council may adopt additional enforcement measures, such fines or legal action, if the problem continues.
He added: “I bought all these businesses when they were closed. If I ever left here, who would occupy these buildings?
We are running a business, we are employing 20 people, we are paying business rates and VAT on our goods. They only see our boxes just because it’s in sight. We only put the pallets out two hours before they come. We don’t have a choice; it’s out of necessity.”
In order to maintain public areas and deal with problems like pavement obstruction, Croydon Council has a thorough enforcement program.
Procedures for reporting and resolving obstacles, such as those brought on by cars or business operations, are included in this policy.
When it comes to age-restricted products like vapes, the council actively enforces trading rules. The council’s dedication to safeguarding youth and guaranteeing adherence to rules is demonstrated by recent prosecutions.
Concerns about antisocial behavior in the neighborhood have centered on the store in recent months.
Many people believe that the crackdown is long needed, and the public has reacted favorably to the council’s decision.
The Conservative council members of South Croydon spearheaded the initiative and received much online acclaim after yesterday’s declaration.
“Hopefully, the start of getting a decent local shopping street back,” wrote Allison Allen, a Facebook commenter.
Later this month, the court will hear the case against the store owner.
Are there any legal precedents for similar cases in Croydon?
The Imam v. LB Croydon’s decision established that local governments, especially those bound by the Housing Act of 1996, cannot claim financial limitations as a justification for not carrying out their mandated responsibilities.
The Supreme Court underlined that courts shouldn’t allow regular violations based on broad allegations of inadequate funding because Parliament imposed these obligations without taking into account the resources that were available.
The ruling establishes a standard for upcoming homelessness and statutory duty cases, reaffirming authorities’ need to give homeless applicants top priority even in the face of financial difficulties.
The case of Darnley v. Croydon Health Service NHS Trust addressed negligence allegations against the NHS Trust, emphasizing causation, duty of care, and breach. Although it has nothing to do with the responsibilities of local authorities, it illustrates how the Supreme Court handles methodical examination of negligence allegations.