Contact Us
Send us your news tips, photos and videos. Text BONEWS and your message to 80360 or for more ways to contact us click» here »
Tell Us what you think of the news of the day
Post your views on our Forum HERE or by email to the Letters Editor HERE
Pub boss demands licence back
11:09am Tuesday 25th September 2007
Comments (424) Have your say »
FURIOUS landlord Nick Hogan has instructed his legal team to contact Bolton Council to demand they reinstate him as the licensee of two town centre bars.
The rebel pub boss found himself locked out of The Swan Hotel and Barristers bar on Friday when the owner of the buildings took action.
Paul Kylie called in bailiffs to break in and change the locks, claiming Mr Hogan had breached the terms of his lease - which states he must abide by all UK laws - by allowing customers to smoke.
A notice was placed in the window claiming any attempts by Mr Hogan to re-enter the pubs would result in criminal or civil action being taken against him.
The rebel landlord - who has been in the news recently for allegedly flouting the smoking ban - went to the High Court in Manchester and claimed he was not a law breaker because he had not been convicted in connection with his reported smoking ban breaches.
He won the right to get back into the two pubs, but as the case was being heard, Mr Kylie and his son, Ryan, visited Bolton Council's licensing department, where they changed the tenancy of The Swan and Barristers, naming Ryan as the new licensee.
Mr Hogan, who opened the pubs as usual over the weekend, has contacted his solicitor.
He has written to Bolton Council demanding they reinstate him as licensee - or face being ordered to do so by the courts. Mr Hogan said: "These are still my pubs and I have no intention of going anywhere."
The controversial landlord has repeatedly allowed drinkers to smoke in the two bars.
He is now awaiting trial after pleading not guilty to five counts of failing to prevent people from smoking and four of obstructing council officers.
A council spokesman said: "We will need to consider the information that has been sent to us."
Your Say Yourtheboltonnews
Tubby Scruff, Alderley Edge says...
11:35am Tue 25 Sep 07
You should applaud Nick Hogan, not because of his anti / pro smoking ect, but because of his stance on what are your civil liberties and the erosion of them. As said, it's nothing to do with pro or anti smoking.
The erosion started with this ban and will slowly creep into areas of your life whereby, you wont have even noticed. This Government have created the most watched society in the World..Why ?
boris, west sussex says...
11:41am Tue 25 Sep 07
Agreed.
blue, Lancs says...
11:41am Tue 25 Sep 07
Smokers (and I include myself in this) never ask everyone in the pub "does anyone mind if I light up?"
And even if someone had the guts to stand up and say yes, in a pub they would have been laughed at nine times out of ten.
Most people who chose not to smoke had to breathe in the fumes like it or not. Where's the choice there?
Aside from that though, I agree that we have more CCTV, tap more phone calls, and have the worlds largest DNA database! Indeed we are moving ever closer to a big brother state.
I do support the smoking ban however.
bachor, over there says...
11:42am Tue 25 Sep 07
cow-head wrote:Allow smoking in pubs only if I am allowed to urinate in your pint - smoke and urine are both sterile fluids so why could you possibly complain about ingesting/inhaling another person's waste?
Keep fighting Nick,dont let the anti-smoking Nazis beat you. From an ex-smoker who believes in civil rights.
boris, west sussex says...
11:47am Tue 25 Sep 07
Nick Hogan was not preventing you from going to other pubs, why should he not have a pub for smokers. I would ask, is there anyone with legal knowledge, it does seem the Council have acted illegally. Nick Hogan has not been found guilty at this present time.
blue, Lancs says...
11:49am Tue 25 Sep 07
King Eric, ......... says...
11:49am Tue 25 Sep 07
He deserves to be placed in the pantheon of great freedom fighters like Che, the Tolpuddle Martyrs,Wolfie Smith, Ghandi...the list goes on.
bachor, over there says...
11:51am Tue 25 Sep 07
I would be more impressed if people used the 'erosion of civil liberties' argument to attack the appalling DNA database rather than preventing death due to exposure to toxins and carcinogens...
blue, Lancs says...
11:52am Tue 25 Sep 07
King Eric, says...
11:53am Tue 25 Sep 07
boris, west sussex says...
11:54am Tue 25 Sep 07
I would be more impressed if people used the 'erosion of civil liberties' argument to attack the appalling DNA database rather than preventing death due to exposure to toxins and carcinogens...
Ban the bloo.y car then, and those evil planes, what would you think a plane spews outin toxins.
blue, Lancs says...
11:55am Tue 25 Sep 07
I don't think Nick Hogan is a man who defends civil liberties becuase he passionately believes in them.
Tubby Scruff, Alderley Edge says...
11:55am Tue 25 Sep 07
Good to see after only 5 posts, the anti smoking brigade are out to hijack once again the story, which if you have a problem understanding is, he's demanded his licence back.
If all we read is true, it would appear the Council have acted outside of the law, which in turn knowing of the folks involved, both in forefront and those lurking in the background, makes you think.
bachor, over there says...
11:56am Tue 25 Sep 07
boris, west sussex says...
11:57am Tue 25 Sep 07
You don't believe in protest do you. Authorities always right. Remember all those law breakers with the poll tax.
blue, Lancs says...
11:57am Tue 25 Sep 07
Boris your right, ban anything that pollutes the atmosphere. Newborn babies are found to have chemicals and toxins, PCB's etc, in thier blood stream as soon as they are delivered. Man made chemicals in the blood of newborns, we will not have long left if we continue to pollute.
chas, suffolk says...
12:00pm Tue 25 Sep 07
If Nick was to ban all non-smokers from his pubs he would be protecting the non-smokers from second hand smoke.
boris, west sussex says...
12:01pm Tue 25 Sep 07
blue, Lancs says...
12:06pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Bit distasteful to compare imposing a tax that penalised the poor, to a law designed to improve public health. I think the motivations are very different whatever you may believe.
King Eric, ......... says...
12:10pm Tue 25 Sep 07
boris, west sussex says...
12:10pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Bit distasteful to compare imposing a tax that penalised the poor, to a law designed to improve public health.
Tell that to the landlords loosing in some cases thousands of pounds a week.
Tommy, says...
12:17pm Tue 25 Sep 07
I'm not part of this anti smoking brigade, I'm part of the anti- naive, sulky, arrogant, ex-landlord brigade.
Serves him right.
Carlos Em, London says...
12:17pm Tue 25 Sep 07
blue wrote:Well he is voicing his opinion with those notices. Its his property and the law is unjust and an infringement on civil liberties. Immagine there's two venues venue A which allows smoking and venue B which doesnt- even a kid could figure out where to go if they want to avoid smoke! God I mean are antismokers/probanne
Boris, living in West Sussex, I don't know if you've seen the letters on the wall in barristers and the swan with wording to the effect that the ban is unjust in his opinion so please feel free to smoke. He wanted a day in court and encouraged members of the public to pick up the fine so he could do so. He has knowingly broke the law to get more business through his doors, reasoning all smokers will simply use his pub only. This is unfair on the licencees that do repect the rule of law.
rs really that thick?
blue, Lancs says...
12:18pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Carlos Em, London says...
12:19pm Tue 25 Sep 07
blue wrote:No- but all this ban is is a group of people IMPOSING their views down other people's throats.
I don't see 200,000 fighting with the police in trafalgar square to defend smoking. Bit distasteful to compare imposing a tax that penalised the poor, to a law designed to improve public health. I think the motivations are very different whatever you may believe.
Carlos Em, London says...
12:19pm Tue 25 Sep 07
blue wrote:Still no defence of this obscene law!
In all honesty since before the millenium the number of pubs shot up, this was particularly true in bolton. Living and working in one, we noted that in 2001, people increasingly having too much debt on credit cards, combined with cheaper beer from the supermarkets, that there were too many pubs and bars in bolton to sustain the trade. People could no longer afford to go out every night, week whatever they had previously. On Churchgate, one bar (forgot the name) only opened thur fri and sat nights. In 2005, the number of pubs shutting a week in the UK was put at 50. I think that the rot set in well before the smoking ban.
RagReader, Horwich says...
12:22pm Tue 25 Sep 07
King Eric wrote:Don't worry,there'll be yards of cut and paste rubbish on here soon.
I'd be very interested in hearing the views of the freedomtochoose organisation on this matter.
Carlos Em, London says...
12:22pm Tue 25 Sep 07
blue wrote:Which of course ETS is unproven to be harmful. ETS is an invention of the antismoking brigade who have their clear connections with Nazi Germany
Anyway Tubby Scruff asked, lets not turn this into a thread on the dangers or health benefits of ETS. I don't think Nick Hogan is a man who defends civil liberties becuase he passionately believes in them.
blue, Lancs says...
12:23pm Tue 25 Sep 07
"The evidence is clear, there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke,"
World Health Organisation Director General Dr Margaret Chan.
I prefer to take my lead from someone who knows what she's talking about, not a bunch of disgruntled smokers.
We are talking about the actions of this man. Unjust law your talking crap.
boris, west sussex says...
12:25pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Posted by: boris, west sussex on 4:01pm Tue 4 Sep 07
Pubs are losing thousands of pounds in takings each week since the smoking ban started. At the Bricklayers Arms in Wool Lane, Midhurst, landlord Paul Blackmun has seen takings slump by around £3,500 per week - the equivalent of more than £180,000 a year. He has had to cover running costs from his own pocket for the first time since he took the pub over. advertisement Mr Blackmun is working 100-hour weeks to try to cut down on overheads and believes he may have to give up the business. He said: "In the two years we've been here we've seen trade go up by 80 per cent, but since the beginning of the month we've seen no new people through the doors and our regulars are not coming in as much. "For example I had one customer who would spend £20 to £30 per day on wine but he won't come in anymore because he can't light up his pipe. People are staying at home instead. "We had a live music night this week which went really well, but whereas before the ban it would have meant our takings were well up, now it's just put us on an even keel." No proof, Erica you idiot.
Pubs are losing thousands of pounds in takings each week since the smoking ban started.
At the Bricklayers Arms in Wool Lane, Midhurst, landlord Paul Blackmun has seen takings slump by around £3,500 per week - the equivalent of more than £180,000 a year.
He has had to cover running costs from his own pocket for the first time since he took the pub over.
advertisement
Mr Blackmun is working 100-hour weeks to try to cut down on overheads and believes he may have to give up the business.
He said: "In the two years we've been here we've seen trade go up by 80 per cent, but since the beginning of the month we've seen no new people through the doors and our regulars are not coming in as much.
"For example I had one customer who would spend £20 to £30 per day on wine but he won't come in anymore because he can't light up his pipe. People are staying at home instead.
"We had a live music night this week which went really well, but whereas before the ban it would have meant our takings were well up, now it's just put us on an even keel."
cow-head, westhoughton says...
12:25pm Tue 25 Sep 07
kerry, says...
12:26pm Tue 25 Sep 07
bachor wrote:you breathe in petrol fumes every day why arent you complaining about that
cow-head wrote:Allow smoking in pubs only if I am allowed to urinate in your pint - smoke and urine are both sterile fluids so why could you possibly complain about ingesting/inhaling another person's waste?
Keep fighting Nick,dont let the anti-smoking Nazis beat you. From an ex-smoker who believes in civil rights.
what about the incinerator at the hospital ?????
keep fighting Nick you have a lot of people on your side
you are in inspiration
King Eric, ......... says...
12:28pm Tue 25 Sep 07
antismoking brigade who have their clear connections with Nazi Germany
Fully agree, the people oposing smokers have their roots in concentration camps, the Holocaust, the SS, the abusing of minorities, gays, gypsies, trade unionists.
In fact I'd say making someone have a cig at a pub door is one of the greatest examples of man's inhumanity to man.
blue, Lancs says...
12:30pm Tue 25 Sep 07
"The evidence is clear, there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke,"
World Health Organisation Director General Dr Margaret Chan.
If you need further defence of this obscene law, Carlos, I'll refer you to the makers of Malboro cigarettes, website, http://www.philipmor
risinternational.com
Now please read carefully,
"Philip Morris International believes that the conclusions of public health officials concerning environmental tobacco smoke are sufficient to warrant measures that regulate smoking in public places. We also believe that where smoking is permitted, the government should require the posting of warning notices that communicate public health officials' conclusions that secondhand smoke causes disease in non-smokers."
Unjust ocscene law. Bollards. Everyone from the Director General of the World Health Organisation, to the makers of the worlds most popular brand Malboro agree....
"The evidence is clear, there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke,"
Thank you and goodnight. Your argument is lost as even the people who make your precious bloody cigarettes agree with me on this one.
Tubby Scruff, Alderley Edge says...
12:31pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Good to see after only 5 posts, the anti smoking brigade are out to hijack once again the story, which if you have a problem understanding is, he's demanded his licence back.
If all we read is true, it would appear the Council have acted outside of the law, which in turn knowing of the folks involved, both in forefront and those lurking in the background, makes you think.
cow-head, westhoughton says...
12:31pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Gloria, Bolton says...
12:32pm Tue 25 Sep 07
As a licensee you have to uphold the law....he is refusing to do so, and has admitted as much. Therefore, he must face the consequences.
Kerry - two wrongs dont make a right!!!!
blue, Lancs says...
12:32pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Tubby Scruff, Alderley Edge says...
12:33pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Erica :
In fact I'd say making someone have a cig at a pub door is one of the greatest examples of man's inhumanity to man.
Actually it is, it's creating an underclass.
Which cant be fair in this so called just society ?
boris, west sussex says...
12:35pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Once again you make a silly point about pubs closing before the ban, I give you proof of a pub suffering since the ban, you then refuse to answer.
RagReader, Horwich says...
12:38pm Tue 25 Sep 07
cow-head wrote:???
Dear Rag Reader, From your comments it is quite obvious that the only rag that you read is the looonie left-wing one. I.E. The Guardian
blue, Lancs says...
12:39pm Tue 25 Sep 07
There'll always bea market for pubs, just how many is another question.
Fwed, Bolton says...
12:41pm Tue 25 Sep 07
blue, Lancs says...
12:42pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Iain, says...
12:42pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Really? Must be the only thing that doesn't have a safe level of exposure.
This is so obviously a false statement to anyone with an ounce of sense.
Has anyone ever seen anyone drop dead due to exposure to this substance?
There is no safe level of public health misinformation. That's all the ban was brought in on, pure scaremongering. And you don't need to quote anyone on this, just use your own brains and experience of life.
Where are those thousand of bodies supposedly killed by passive smoking every year? Who are these people dropping like flies after being exposed to this deadly substance that has no safe level of exposure?
It's a myth and it's about time it was exposed as a myth in this country in a court of law.
blue, Lancs says...
12:43pm Tue 25 Sep 07
blue, Lancs says...
12:47pm Tue 25 Sep 07
http://www.philipmor
risinternational.com
/PMINTL/pages/eng/sm
oking/Secondhand_smo
ke.asp
Just cut and paste the above into your link bar.
It really is simple and how you believe you are a more credible authority on public health than the Director General of the World Health Organisation staggers me. Find me a non smoker, someone who has never smoked, that will defend it as vigourously as someone addicted to the drug. There isn't. So a desperate crazed smoker with no medical background is an authority on the medical effects of tobacco smoke? No way. No. Never.
chas, suffolk says...
12:49pm Tue 25 Sep 07
They could go into well ventilated pubs or drink in outside gardens like they do now with their friends who smoke.
boris, west sussex says...
12:50pm Tue 25 Sep 07
I'm sorry a business is suffering, and I've no doubt many are, but thats no excuse to resume smoking. If there's no money in it do something else.
You arrogant sod, if it was your livelyhood, you wouldn't be saying...ha ha ha, I'll go and do something else.
Phil Williams, Norfolk says...
12:51pm Tue 25 Sep 07
I'm sure he's very understanding about your intollerance of him.
JoePublic, Bolton says...
12:51pm Tue 25 Sep 07
It's a myth and it's about time it was exposed as a myth in this country in a court of law.
Then Hogan's prosecution is the ideal opportunity. Those of you against the ban: you now have your martyr. Organise, fundraise but above all support him. Prove to the rest of us that this ban is unjust and does not have the support of the majority of the population.
I have always said that other than a few hardliners such as Mr Hogan it is no more than a minor inconvenience to smokers. Now is the chance to prove me wrong. The ball's in your court.
Tubby Scruff, Alderley Edge says...
12:52pm Tue 25 Sep 07
With respect, I don't suppose you and many others will know much about Philip Morris Inc ?
A few years ago, PM were involved in a number of high profile legal cases in the U.S. and I think France. I don't recall if they lost, I think they did and it cost them an awful lot of money, more than the Euro millions jackpot this week.
Of course, PM will say publicly they support the ban, though in reality if they did, why can you still buy PM products across the world ?
They say they support it, to exonerate themselves from any future cases which may come their way. In other words, they've taken a leaf (no pun) out of the Governments book..it's spin and lies..but it looks good to say it.
kieanders, bolton says...
12:53pm Tue 25 Sep 07
chas wrote:and the tables have turned. the majority get to sit in the warm, the minority in the rain for a couple of minutes an hour! scandalous!
Non-smokers have always had a right not to take in others peoples smoke. They could go into well ventilated pubs or drink in outside gardens like they do now with their friends who smoke.
lets have it right, darwen says...
12:58pm Tue 25 Sep 07
mercy, bolton says...
12:59pm Tue 25 Sep 07
King Eric wrote:You're mother wouldnt be called -jackie these days would she?
I'd be very interested in hearing the views of the freedomtochoose organisation on this matter.
Tubby Scruff, Alderley Edge says...
1:00pm Tue 25 Sep 07
boris, west sussex says...
1:00pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Yes.
mercy, bolton says...
1:02pm Tue 25 Sep 07
King Eric wrote:Not quite! Got asmall life to go with your mind havent you?
antismoking brigade who have their clear connections with Nazi GermanyFully agree, the people oposing smokers have their roots in concentration camps, the Holocaust, the SS, the abusing of minorities, gays, gypsies, trade unionists. In fact I'd say making someone have a cig at a pub door is one of the greatest examples of man's inhumanity to man.
Horwich Allstars, Horwich says...
1:04pm Tue 25 Sep 07
chas, suffolk says...
1:04pm Tue 25 Sep 07
I don't know what pubs you go to, but I find my locals have the MAJORITY outside and the sad minority inside. Could this be that the majority of drinkers like a cigarette or lovely cigar with their drink?
boris, west sussex says...
1:05pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Not quite! Got asmall life to go with your mind havent you?
That's not all that is small that's why he's now Erica,
mercy, bolton says...
1:08pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Carlos Em wrote:what about these smokers, imposing their cancer sticks and pollution down other peoples lungs, we all remember Roy Castle - never smoked yet worked in clubs and died from lung cancer, that passive smoking for you. He chose not to smoke - yet others imposed their filthy cancer sticks into his lungs via pollution - and killed him. Smokers collectively murdered Roy Castle. There must be others out there, what about the respitary problems casued to others because of it? Those non smokers with Asthma? Not really fair it is, theres are legitimate law enforced reason for this - think!
blue wrote: I don't see 200,000 fighting with the police in trafalgar square to defend smoking. Bit distasteful to compare imposing a tax that penalised the poor, to a law designed to improve public health. I think the motivations are very different whatever you may believe.No- but all this ban is is a group of people IMPOSING their views down other people's throats.
blue, Lancs says...
1:08pm Tue 25 Sep 07
Yes they are protecting against future class action suites etc, by claiming we told you all along, BAT also supports the reguilation of smoking in public places because they know one day there will be a case to answer.
So being exposed as a myth in a court of law is certainly not what the cigarette makers are expecting, quite the opposite, but enough, no one will ever coninve you otherwise and I accept that.
Lets face it sex is more satisfying than a cigarette and we're not allowed to do that in a pub are we?
As for arrogance, Boris I'm not taking you on as your a hypocryte. You say smoking doesn't harm others yet state you don't smoke around your children - prey tell me why? You won't 'cos everytime you get asked an awkward question, and its true I've thrown many at you, you simply reply with an inane question.
cow-head, westhoughton says...
11:25am Tue 25 Sep 07