Charity's bid to hold door-to-door collections in Northampton refused by councillors

A charity’s bid to hold door-to-door collections in Northampton has been refused by councillors.

Wednesday, 12th June 2019, 3:02 pm
The borough council's licensing committee has refused the application

The collections would have been carried out by a private company, Recycle Proline Ltd, on behalf of Cancer Research & Genetics UK.

But in order to do so, the charity needed to be granted a licensing permit, and councillors had enough concerns in order to refuse the application at the second time of asking.

They had previously deferred the application at a previous meeting on April 23 to invite members of the charity to attend the meeting and answer questions.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

Speaking at the latest licensing committee meeting on Tuesday (June 11), senior licensing officer Louise Faulkner said: “At the previous meeting, questions about the group’s accounts were raised by councillors. It was agreed to give them the opportunity to attend a meeting and ensure some of those questions were answered.

“I had a telephone conversation on April 29 with Recycle Proline Ltd, and sent an email. On June 5 I received an email from them apologising for the delay in answering, but that they would not be able to attend meetings on either of the dates given. There was no further additional information.”

If granted a licence, the group would have collected items of clothing, shoes and other recyclable items from households in the area which would have then been sold and, after deducting expenses, pay a proportion of the proceeds to Cancer Research.

The applicant has previously been granted licences by Eden, Bath & North East Somerset local authorities, but the group’s unwillingness to allow itself to be scrutinised by the committee members in Northampton has backfired.

Licensing committee member Councillor Gareth Eales said: “I would suggest that we refuse on the grounds that the applicant has neglected to furnish us with information we reasonably require for the purpose of informing our decision.”