A west London restaurant which employed illegal workers and paid one staff member in food and travel costs will be allowed to continue operating despite Home Office requests to have the license revoked.
It has had its licence suspended for three months, after which it can operate as normal again.
The restaurant, Khushi Nepalese Restaurant, which trades under Nepal Authentic Dining, 23 Boston Road, in Hanwell, was visited by immigration enforcement in December 2024 following a tip off that some staff were working illegally.
Officials found eight staff members, four of whom were arrested for immigration offences.
Three of those arrested had no right to work in the UK, and one had breached their conditions by working. Following an investigation, officers discovered that one employee was not even being paid by the restaurant, instead, he was offered food and work travel expenses as a form of payment.
Additionally, the other three employees were being paid below minimum wage, with varying rates between £8.30 to £11 an hour, at a time when minimum wage was £11.44 per hour. Immigration officers described this as “clear evidence of labour exploitation.”
The Home Office requested that Ealing Council revoke the license entirely, due to what it described as “serious” concerns of “exploitation” and inadequate right to work checks. Despite this, the council only enforced a three month suspension of the license rather than revoking it.
Returning the committee’s decision, Councillor Rima Baaklini said: “The panel acknowledged the premises license holder’s [Mr Ojesh Lal Singh] passion, long service the restaurant had provided to the community and the positive role it played within the Hanwell area, which many residents were able to testify to in the supporting representation.
“However, the panel noted that the licensing objective of prevention of crime and disorder had not been promoted, and they heard about the evidence of illegal staff and staff exploitation at the premises in December 2024, including one instance where a member of staff was not paid at all, and was only offered food and travel expenses as an incentive.
“The panel also noted that Mr Singh held his hands up from the outset, and paid the civil penalty to the Home Office, in the sum of £56,000 for immigration offences, together with immediate changes on how he operates the premises. Mr Singh is now more involved with the business and offered a number of additional conditions to the committee, therefore the panel concluded that it would not be appropriate to revoke the license at this stage.”
The restaurant will be forced to operate under new conditions including holding and maintaining relevant right to work documents on site and all staff being trained on licensing laws.
Mr Singh, responsible for overseeing the business, argued that at the time of the immigration officers visit, he had just lost his manager. He told the committee that he was not involved with staff tendering, rather the previous manager, whom he has an association with outside of the restaurant, had hired them, describing it as an “oversight” on his behalf.
However, this seemed to contradict the evidence presented by the Home Office. During the investigation, and interviews with the illegal workers, they only ever spoke of Mr Singh, with no mention of a previous manager.
They spoke of Mr Singh as being the man who would pay them, often cash in hand, meaning tax and national insurance was not being paid on their income.
Mr Singh paid the fine in full swiftly after it was served to him. He pledged to be more careful, and says he has already taken measures to ensure this does not happen again.
The restaurant will now serve a three-month suspension on its licence, after which it will be allowed to operate as normal again.
