Appendix C

SUP 1 – SC valid on the grounds of PPN and PCH.

From: REDACTED
Sent: 03 April 2026 21:51
To: EHL Licensing <ehl.licensing@brighton-hove.gov.uk>
Subject: Supporting representation to review of CinCin's License

Dear Brighton and Hove Licensing Team,  

I am writing to make a representation to the review of CinCin's license, as per the notice in the window of the restaurant. I live atREDACTED, just behind the restaurant, and wanted to express my belief that the license is violated under the existing grounds of 1) the grounds of prevention of public nuisance as well as 2) the protection of children from harm. 

Ground 1: The prevention of public nuisance  

Overview: The constant noise of the extractor fan at CinCin has been impacting on the health and comfort of several residents, as well as obstructing our right to the enjoyment of our own homes. At the same time, there is no public benefit to the noise of the extractor fan, as there are several quieter alternatives available on the market. With several scientific studies showing the negative impact of constant noise, including low frequency, the benefit to the restaurant seems very outweighed by the impact on the public. The restaurant owner has also not taken any action to address the issues, despite complaints first being raised directly to him in May 2025 and evidence of impacts on health and wellbeing from residents who have written to him directly. This is negligence.

• Impact on health and comfort: CinCin is open 5 days a week, with noise starting long-before the restaurant is open.  The noise is a constant background hum, audible over the television and house internal appliances. I'm 38 weeks pregnant and the noise has for me personally caused a) severe anxiety and low moods, due to the disturbance I am suffering and my concern for the impact on my unborn child and our ability to ever move out of this property given the effect a statutory complaint will have on it’s value. This has been an issue I’ve explored with my therapist, and I would be happy to support with a statement from them about therapy sessions where I have raised the issue and the upset it has caused me b) persistent migraines. Since moving in , I have had several migraines with visual aura. Again, these have been documented  as they can be a symptom of a potentially serious pregnancy complication so I have had to ring the Maternity Assessment Unit in Brighton several times to check that I'm not having a major health episode.

All of these impacts are underpinned in scientific literature and also in local planning policy / guidance:

·       As the Brighton City Plan itself acknowledges “Noise and vibration, even from a proposed means of ventilation, can potentially have a serious impact on residential amenity, quality of life and biodiversity”.

·       Several studies show that “long term exposure to environmental noise is associated with a wide range of adverse health outcomes, including sleep disturbance and cardiovascular diseases”.

·       The Environmental Protection Agency, and DEFRA, have found that low frequency noises specifically (such as those caused by the extractor fan) can causes stress, “feelings of irritation and unease, fatigue, headache, nausea and disturbed sleep” and induce “disruption and significant social and economic penalties to sufferers”.

• Impact on enjoyment in our own homes: I’m unable to open windows when the fan is on, due to the loud nature of the noise. We’ve bought sound-proofed curtains (I can provide the receipt to show proof of this) but even with the windows closed it is very loud. I’m highly concerned about how we will manage the temperature in our house in summer, particularly with a young child who is at risk of overheating as a baby. The street and garden are also unbearable to be in when the noise is very loud (as it most evenings and increasingly in the daytime). I currently only open my windows and doors on Monday’s and Sunday’s when the restaurant is closed.

• The noise is affecting a large group: I know that many neighbours on my street and a local business have complained to the councils' Environmental Health team about this issue already.

• There is no public benefit to the level of noise vs the impact: Information online suggests that it is very easy and affordable to install a quiet extractor fan.

The CinCin fan is operating at a disproportionate level of noise to that needed to ventilate the restaurant. This is proven by the fact that the previous fan operated for years with no impact or complaints from residents. At the same time , the CinCin fan operates constantly at high capacity even when the restaurant’s kitchen is not in use. Multiple residents have reported that the fan is on all day from 9am to 10.30/11.30pm. I have also taken a video from the street outside (which can be shared on request) which demonstrates the fan on loudly when the restaurant is closed and there is no one in the kitchen and no signs of any food prep taking place.

This level of noise also goes against local Building regulations which state that fans should not be “overly noisy” and should “not operate near maximum capacity when in normal background ventilation mode”.

In previous Brighton & Hove planning decisions, the council has required that noise associated with plant and machinery be controlled such that the Rating Level measured or calculated at 1-metre from the façade of the nearest future noise sensitive premises, shall not exceed a level 5dB below the existing LA90 background noise level. A simple reading would easily demonstrate that the CiCin fan far exceeds this level.

·                The owner has acted with negligence: Complaints were raised to the owner as early as May 2025, with local residents raising impacts on health and wellbeing (including on two small children). Despite this, there appears to have been little to no action taken to address the noise of the fan through structural interventions or professional assessments. There has also been no action taken to minimize the impacts through either reduced operating hours or lower levels of fan use. As above, the fan often operates all day, at maximum volume, from around 9am to the morning to 10.30/11.30pm at night. It seems unlikely that food prep is taking place solidly for 13 hours given the size of the venue.

The restaurant itself is not open until 5pm and food is also unlikely to be being cooked at 10.30/11.30pm at night. In fact there is actually a review available online where the owner directly states that customers have to leave by 11 so no cooking is taking place then. As such, it seems unusual that despite the frequent complaints from local residents, the fan is being run all day and night.

Ground 2) Protection of children from harm. According to the guidance, all premises license holders must ensure they are fulfilling their responsibility to safeguard children in and around their premises.

Overview: As mentioned above, I’m currently 8 months pregnant with my first child and have raised my concerns directly to the owner about the impact the constant noise will have on him. The babies nursery is one of the most affected in the house. Again this impact is substantiated by a wealth of scientific evidence, which show the impact of background noise and low frequency noise on children’s health. I'm sure our child is not the only one in a residence around the restaurant, and won't be over the long term. For example:

• This article explains, from multiple studies, how background noise can impact toddler’s abilities to learn words.

• This paper links background noise to stress, sleep disturbance, elevated cortisol, headaches and fatigue and notes that young children are particularly vulnerable.

• This system review of 26 studies found that long-term chronic background noise (such as from ventilation) is associated with lower academic performance, particularly reading skills, poor memory performance and increased cognitive fatigue.

• This article explains that exposing children to low-frequency noise, even at moderate levels (35–65 dB), noise increased annoyance and reduced task performance in complex tasks.

• This study found that children exposed to chronic noise have slower development and working memory. Even a +5 decibel increase led to 11 slower working memory development and 23 percent slower complex working memory development.

 Please do let me know if I can provide any further information.

 Best wishes, 

REDACTED

SUP 2 – SC valid on the grounds of PPN

From: REDACTED

Sent: 09 April 2026 13:01

To: EHL Licensing <ehl.licensing@brighton-hove.gov.uk>

Subject: Representation regarding license review of Cin Cin 60 Western Road BN3 1JD

This email originates from outside of Brighton & Hove City Council. Please think carefully before opening attachments or clicking on links.

Dear Brighton and Hove Licensing Team,

I am writing to make a representation to the review of Cin Cin's license which I believe has undermined the objective of prevention of public nuisance.

The noise disturbance from Cin Cin’s extractor fan has impacted the health and comfort of at least 15 neighbours in REDACTED, where I live, and obstructed our right to the enjoyment of our homes for almost 12 months. There is no public benefit to Cin Cin’s installation of a new extractor fan (approximately 12 months ago) as the previous extractor fan was in operation for several years without issue. Indeed, we live close to a number of business (public house, supermarket etc.) and these businesses do not cause a public nuisance.

Scientific studies evidence the negative impact of constant noise disturbance, in particular low frequency noise, so any benefit to the restaurant doesn’t outweigh the health impact on the public. The extractor fan noise has impacted over 15 residents up to 15 hours each day for at least 5 days per week for nearly 12 months. The constant noise is audible 70 metres away from the restaurant. Despite ongoing complaints from numerous residents, Cin Cin have taken no action to remedy the impact on neighbours. This is negligence, especially as the owner and license holder acknowledges the increased noise from the new extractor fan and is fully aware (via Environmental Health and direct correspondence with neighbours) on the level of disturbance caused by their decision to install a louder extractor fan.

The impact on our health and enjoyment of our own home corresponds with scientific literature and local planning policy / guidance. These acknowledge "noise and vibration, even from a proposed means of ventilation, can potentially have a serious impact on residential amenity, quality of life and biodiversity”. Studies show that "long term exposure to environmental noise is associated with a wide range of adverse health outcomes, including sleep disturbance and cardiovascular diseases”. The Environmental Protection Agency and DEFRA have found that low frequency noise can cause "feelings of irritation and unease, fatigue, headache, nausea and disturbed sleep" and induce "disruption and significant social and economic penalties to sufferers”.

The documented noise disturbance affects a large group of neighbours and a local business. It doesn’t appear necessary as a quiet extractor fan had previously been in operation for several years. The negligence extends to the fan being operational when the restaurant is closed to customers and potentially contravenes local Building Regulations which state that fans should not be "overly noisy" and should "not operate near maximum capacity when in normal background ventilation mode”. Brighton & Hove planning decisions have required that noise associated with plant and machinery be controlled. Cin Cin’s fan significantly exceeds the planning condition of 5dB below the existing LA90 background noise level when measured 1 metre from the façade of the nearest noise sensitive premises.

The owner has acted with negligence regarding dozens of local resident complaints dating back to May 2025. This includes the impact on health and wellbeing of young children, the elderly, people with hearing aids etc. The owner has taken no material action to address these concerns or minimise impact. Cin Cin’s extractor fan continues to operate up to 15 hours each day for at least 5 days per week and is audible by neighbours up to 70 metres away from the restaurant.

Thank you for considering my representation and I look forward to heating back from you.

Warm regards,

REDACTED

SUP 3- SC valid on the grounds of PPN.

From: REDACTED
Sent: 16 April 2026 14:44
To: EHL Licensing <ehl.licensing@brighton-hove.gov.uk>
Subject: Prevention of Public Nuisance 2026/01118/LAREV Cin Cin 60 Western Road Hove 

I am writing on behalf of Hidden Hearing in connection with the Review of the Premises Licence for Cin Cin Restaurant, 60 Western Road, Hove, under the licensing objective of Prevention of Public Nuisance.

In June 2025, we began to notice a recurring drone or vibration-type noise which appeared to be affecting our premises. Given the nature of our work as an audiology provider, we operate soundproof testing rooms where a very quiet and stable acoustic environment is essential.

At an early stage, we sought to raise the issue informally with the restaurant, with the aim of understanding whether there might be an explanation and whether any adjustments could be made. We initially attempted to discuss the matter with David, one of the owners. While these conversations did not lead to a shared understanding at that time, we later spoke with Jamie, the Head Chef and part-owner, who was open and receptive to our concerns.

Jamie very kindly visited our branch to experience the noise directly and was surprised by how noticeable it was within our testing rooms. Since then, he has been our main point of contact, and we have appreciated his willingness to engage with the issue as it has progressed.

Over a number of months, we were advised that various options were being explored, including potential temporary measures and changes to equipment use, and that solutions were being considered. Unfortunately, despite these discussions, the noise has continued and no lasting resolution has been achieved.

Our Estates Manager has provided a detailed letter in support of our position (attached). In summary, the presence of extraneous noise presents ongoing challenges for Hidden Hearing. During hearing assessments, patients have queried the unexpected background noise and expressed concern as to whether it is something they should be perceiving, which can understandably undermine confidence in the testing process. Additionally, staff working in these conditions for extended periods have reported discomfort, including headaches.

More recently, through discussions with other nearby occupiers, we became aware that a Review of the Premises Licence had been submitted. In that context, we felt it appropriate to add our perspective and explain how the issue continues to affect our service.

Hidden Hearing fully recognises the importance of nearby businesses operating successfully, and our intention has always been to resolve this matter constructively. It is our understanding that the source of the noise may be capable of being addressed without disproportionate cost, provided appropriate steps are taken to investigate and mitigate it.

We respectfully ask that the Licensing Authority take our experience into consideration as part of the review process and consider whether any measures or conditions might assist in ensuring that the licensing objective of preventing public nuisance is upheld.

Kind Regards,

REDACTED

SUP 4- SC valid on the grounds of PPN.

Representation on behalf of the Environmental Protection Team under Prevention of Public Nuisance in support of the Review of the Premises Licence of Cin Cin, 60 Western Road, Hove BN3 1JD.

On the 7^th of May 2025 a complaint was received concerning extraction system noise from Cin Cin, 60 Western Road, Hove. Over the course of the investigation, four more complaints local to the surrounding area came in concerning the same issue of extraction system noise. The information that was obtained from the complainants was consistent in that the extraction system only became a problem for them in April of 2025 when it was stated by the complainants that Cin Cin had a new extraction system installed. 

On the 27^th of May 2025 one of the complainants withdrew their complaint, as they had decided it was best for them to move house rather than continue with the investigation.

Diaries were returned and visits were made to complainants to witness the noise (5/6/25, 16/6/25, 20/6/25, 26/6/25, 20/8/25). Despite visits, no statutory nuisance could be determined from any of the complainants’ residences. Visits were made in pairs.

On the 13^th of June 2025, readings were taken from one of the complainant’s addresses to try and determine what the complainant might actually be hearing. The readings did not give us any further information. Please be aware that we do not make a judgement on statutory nuisance based upon readings. Noise does not have to be measured in decibels to be a statutory nuisance. (Sound level meters—if used—are not determinative evidence.)

On the 17^th of August 2025, information on how to obtain Mediation was sent to the complainants.

On the 9^th of September 2025, after reviewing the case with the Team Leader, Timothy Start, it was decided that the case should be closed due to lack of evidence. The case was closed and closure letters sent to the complainants.

On the 10^th of November a new complainant contacted EP and the case was reopened. Visits were made but due to extremely high winds and rain we were unable to determine a statutory nuisance.

A seventh complainant came forward in December 2025 and was immediately contacted on the 8^th. A dairy was returned. A visit was made on the 11^th of December 2025 but the extraction system was not on. On the 17^th of December another visit was made around 12:37 with accompanying officers. Walking through the corridors of the building, we could hear a low droning/humming noise in the corridor as we approached the complainant’s door. When we stepped inside the complainant’s residence the noise was tonal, constant, and filled the room. We determined that the noise from the extraction system was invasive and detrimental to health and the enjoyment of their residence.

On the 19^th of December 2025 we wrote to Mr Toscano concerning our findings. It was decided to give a seven-day period to allow Mr Toscano time to procure information that may help to mitigate the situation. As it was the holiday period, the seven-day delay in serving an Abatement Notice would begin on January 5^th 2026. 

On the 15^th of January I made a visit back to the complainant with another officer. There was no change and the noise was still statutory. It was decided that an Abatement Notice would be served. Notice was served on the 19^th of January, 2026.

REDACTED

Technical Officer, Environmental Protection

SUP 5 – SC valid on the grounds of PPN.

From: REDACTED
Sent: 28 April 2026 17:50
To: EHL Licensing <ehl.licensing@brighton-hove.gov.uk>
Subject: Cin Cin License review

  Dear Licensing Team,

I am writing to make a formal representation related to the review of the premises licence for Cin Cin, on the grounds of prevention of public nuisance.

We have lived in REDACTED for over 25 years. Despite the central location, it is a peaceful and tranquil residential setting thanks to being a no through road.  We have been a contented neighbour to the various businesses that operate nearby. I raise this matter because the situation now feels different and because it does not need to be this way.

Approximately one year ago, Cin Cin installed a new extractor fan. From that point, the character of the noise emanating from the restaurant changed significantly. The previous fan operated without causing excessive disturbance to residents; the replacement does not. When in operation, the noise is continuous, loud, and — crucially — audible far beyond the immediate vicinity of the restaurant.  We live part way along the road, but the noise can be heard at the far end of the mews.  

This is not a reasonable situation in an otherwise peaceful residential area. Our enjoyment of the garden is disturbed. The impact on sleep is particularly significant. The fan operates until after 11pm, which means it is often running precisely during the period when trying to fall asleep. The noise can be heard even with windows closed.  In the summer, we would like to have windows open at night however this means the noise is much worse. We really do appreciate Sundays and Mondays when the restaurant is closed!

I want to be clear that I am not opposed to Cin Cin as a business — it has been part of this neighbourhood for a decade and I have no wish to see it disadvantaged. However, the previous extractor fan operated for years without causing this level of disruption. The problem is not so much the existence of the fan, but the decision to replace it with equipment that is clearly unsuitable for use in a residential area. That is a choice that can be undone, and I would urge the Licensing Authority to require Cin Cin to take the necessary steps to return noise levels to something comparable to what residents experienced prior to this installation. There is no way that any new planning or licensing application would permit what we are now forced to endure.

I respectfully ask that the committee give weight to the cumulative impact on residents — many of whom, like myself, have lived here for a long time — and act to protect the amenity of this community.

Yours faithfully, 

REDACTED