I SHOULD like to clarify points raised by David Mudie regarding the public notices posted at the Barbican Centre for a licensing application under the Licensing Act 2003 (Letters, June 23).

Mr Mudie stated that, contrary to national guidelines, the notices did not include times for the proposed activities. Although this is correct, the notice met all legal requirements. The guidelines are an aid to good practice, but they came out after the application was made and have no weight in law.

The notice is only designed to highlight that an application has been made and invites interested parties to view it in full at the council offices. So I had no legal grounds to declare the notice invalid.

Mr Mudie states that the wrong closing date for objections was given on the notice. The licensing authority calculated the closing date for receipt of objections as May 27 - three working days earlier than stated by the applicant.

By law, the closing date should be 28 days from when the application was given to the authority by the applicant. This is vague. Does the time start from when the application was posted or when it was received?

Where there are differences between the authority's calculation and that of the applicant? I always ensure there is no disadvantage to those wanting to object.

In the case of the Barbican application, all objections received before June 2 were accepted, giving objectors more time to comment on the application, not less.

Mr Mudie's was wrong to say that the licence notice gave the wrong address. The correct postal address was on the notice.

Given the high level of response to the application, I am satisfied that local residents were well informed of the application and have had a reasonable chance to voice their opinions.

Dick Haswell,

Head of licensing and

regulation,

City of York Council,

St Leonard's Place,

York.

Updated: 11:15 Tuesday, June 28, 2005