Residents using AI to object to forecourt expansion plans – and how to combat this

Fuel retailers looking to implement changes to their forecourt operations are having to deal with AI-generated objections from local residents, a leading solicitor has said – while also offering advice on how to tackle this issue.

Robert Botkai, a regular contributor to Forecourt Trader and senior partner at law firm Winckworth Sherwood, was representing Samy Group in its application for a 24-hour alcohol licence at a filling station in Cornwall.

Addressing local objections that extending the site’s licence would lead to an increase in vehicle movements, car doors being slammed and shouting, Botkai told Cornwall Council’s licensing subcommittee:

“This is the sort of thing now, particularly thanks to AI – I’m not casting aspersions – but this wording we see in virtually every representation when we put in an application, because that’s what the AI tools bring up if you say you’re a neighbour and you want to object to an alcohol licence nearby.”

Speaking to Forecourt Trader, Botkai detailed that hearings are only held for alcohol licences if “relevant” representations are made, with this status being achieved if objections relate to crime and disorder, public nuisance or safety, or the protection of children from harm, with public health an additional category in Scotland.

He explains: “By getting assistance from one of the AI tools their representations become relevant by setting out concerns neatly under the headings of the licensing objectives.”

But ensuring those objection category boxes are ticked doesn’t mean the concerns raised will hold merit, Botkai cautions.

“Very often when residents oppose an application, they fail to make their representations relevant and so an officer will rule that they are invalid”.

One objection raised against Samy Group’s 24-hour alcohol application in Cornwall related to “a concern that the extended hours could affect children and young people”, which Botkai addressed by telling the council’s licensing subcommittee that this was not relevant as Samy Group operates a ‘challenge 25’ policy and doesn’t sell alcohol to children.

While he considers that it is “certainly arguable that the use of AI can level the playing field as residents are not so likely to be caught by a lack of knowledge of the licensing system”, Botkai also says “it is fairly easy to tell whether a representation has been crafted using AI, as they almost always make comments under each of the headings”.

He also cautions that he has “seen numerous examples” of AI ‘hallucinations’ in objections, with “fictionised case precedents, extracts from statutes that do not exist, and paragraphs purporting to be from a statement of licensing policy”.

How to tackle AI planning objections

Botkai says forecourt operators who think local objections may contain errors or inaccuracies after having been crafted with the help of AI should be aware that “knowingly or recklessly making a false statement in a licence application is a criminal offence”.

While he would “rarely advocate” confronting residents with this detail as such people are “likely to be an applicant’s neighbour and customer”, Botkai says operators may find it helpful to have “a quiet word with the licensing officer” about any such concerns, as this is likely to “ensure that little if any weight is attached to such a representation”.