Sort file:- Ramsgate, May, 2021.

Page Updated:- Monday, 10 May, 2021.


Earliest 1964-

(Name from)

Flowing Bowl


Jan 2011

St John's Avenue and Princess Margaret Avenue



Flowing Bowl

Picture by Nick Smith March 2008, and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence.

Flowing Bowl 2010


Formerly known as the "Cherry Orchard."


Thanet Times, Tuesday 8 December, 1964.

From Poplar to the seaside.

Jim Sissons 1965

A London couple who visited Thanet for their holidays for many years, moved to Ramsgate last month and are settling down at the "Flowing Bowl" in the middle of Newington housing estate.

Landlord Mr. Jim's Sissons said:- "We little thought that we would come here to live.

He and his family have moved to the seaside from Poplar, in London's East End, where he worked at Ford's Dagenham car factory before entering the licensed trade.

"Why did we come to Thanet?" Answering this question, he said:- "Because the East End is pretty crowded these days and we thought we would like to give the children a break from London."

Mr. and Mrs. Sissons have two children, a boy and a girl.

The "Flowing Bowl" is there third licence house, the last being in Poplar.

Apart from their holiday trips, they have another link with Thanet. Licensee of the "Ruby Lounge," Margate, Mr. Douglas Barthaud, is a cousin of Mr. Sissons.

"He came here about 2 years ago," said Mr. Sissons, who took over the "Flowing Bowl" on 23rd November.



This pub has now unfortunately been demolished by Thanet District Council in January 2011.


Flower Bowl presentation

Above presentation produced in 2011.

Flower Bowl presentation

Above presentation kindly sent by Angie b15a 13 September 2018.


From Thanet District Council Report 22 April, 2010.

To: Council 22 April 2010

By: Harvey Patterson, Monitoring Officer

Classification: Unrestricted

Summary: To note the urgent action taken by the Portfolio holder for Community Services in relation to the surrender of the lease of the Flowing Bowl Public House

For Information

1.0 Background

1.1 The Flowing Bowl Public House is adjacent to the Centre Newington, this being the location of one of the Council's priority housing regeneration schemes. The Council is the freeholder owner of the Public House although the premises were subject to a long lease in favour of Admiral Taverns. The acquisition of the Public House would facilitate site assembly for the regeneration project and to this end the Council had earmarked HRA capital funding to acquire the lease of the premises (i.e. negotiate a surrender of the lease) in this financial year (2010/11).

1.2 In the middle of March Admiral Taverns indicated that it was willing to surrender the lease of the premises to the Council for 125,000 (144,688 inclusive of VAT) on condition (presumably for tax reasons) that completion took place in the 2009/10 tax year. As a result, the Director of Community Services instructed an external valuer who franked the surrender value as representing market value given the special value to the Council.

2.0 Decision to Accept Surrender

2.1 In the normal course of events the decision to accept the surrender of the Flowing Bowl Public House for the surrender premium could have been taken by the Cabinet Portfolio holder for Community Services under delegated powers. However, because this would have constituted a Key Decision which did not appear on the latest published edition of the Forward Plan and because there was no budget to acquire the lease in 2009/10, the Portfolio holder for Community Services could only take the decision if the Chairman of the Overview & Scrutiny Panel agreed pursuant to Rule 17 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules and Rule 4 of the Budget and Policy Framework Procedure Rules that the matter was urgent, could not reasonably be deferred and that it was not practical to convene a quorate meeting of Council to determine the matter.

2.2 It also followed that if the decision to accept a surrender of the lease of the Flowing Bowl Public House should be taken as a matter of urgency to achieve the 2009/10 tax deadline imposed by Admiral Taverns, the decision should also be exempt from Call-In by the Overview & Scrutiny Panel in order that it could be implemented immediately. In this regard, only the Chairman of the Council (or in the absence of the Chairman of the Council, the Vice-Chairman) can authorise the exemption of a key decision from the Call In procedure pursuant to Rule 15(j) of the Overview & Scrutiny Procedure Rules on the grounds that the decision is urgent and any delay likely to be caused by the call-in process would seriously prejudice the Council's interests or the public interest.

3.0 Consents Obtained

3.1 The necessary consents were obtained from the Chairman of the Council and the Chairman of the Overview & Scrutiny Panel on 30 March 2010.

4.0 Decision Taken

4.1 On 31 March 2010 the Portfolio holder for Community Services took the decision to authorise the acceptance of a surrender of the lease of the Flying Bowl Public House from Admiral Taverns. On 4 April 2010 - i.e. within the 2009/10 tax year - the Council accepted the surrender of the premises for a surrender premium of 125,000 plus VAT.

5.0 Corporate Implications

5.1 Financial

5.1.1 Although the Council took the surrender of the lease in the 2009/10 tax year, it actually fell in the 20010/11 financial year. As a result, there was adequate budgetary provision to meet the surrender costs.

5.2 Legal

5.2.1 Rule 4 of the Budget & Policy Framework Procedure Rules require that any decision taken outside the Budget on urgency grounds is reported to the next available meeting of the Council.

5.3 Corporate

5.3.1 The voluntary acquisition of the Flying Bowl Public House will assist in the site assembly for an important redevelopment project.

5.4 Equalities

5.4.1 None apparent

6.0 Recommendations

The Council notes the urgent action taken by the Portfolio holder for Community Services with the agreement of the Chairman of the Council and the Chairman of the Overview & Scrutiny Panel in authorising the taking of a surrender of the lease of the Flowing Bowl Public House, Newington.

Background Papers. None

Contact Officer: Harvey Patterson, Head of Legal & Democratic Services

Reporting to: Richard Samuel, Chief Executive

From 19 August, 2011

THE distressed mother of a man who died following a fight four years ago is still waiting to discover the cause of her son's death.

June Greenidge, 73, says she still does not know why Thanet coroner Rebecca Cobb has not resumed the inquest into Wayne Greenidge's death after it began back in July 2008. She said: "The coroner has been asked to resume the case repeatedly by my solicitor and I still don't know why she won't get on with it. I just want to know why my son died so I can move on."

June Greenidge

STILL NO ANSWER: June Greenidge standing next to a community shrine in The Centre.

Unemployed labourer Mr Greenidge was sitting on a bench outside the former "Flowing Bowl" pub just after 7pm on August 13, 2007, when he became embroiled in a row with two other men. It led to a fight in which Mr Greenidge lost consciousness and later died.

Mrs Greenidge, who regularly attaches flowers to a tree on a roundabout in The Centre, Newington, to pay tribute to her son, said: "This has been an awful wait. It was so hard for me to give permission three years ago to release his brain so doctors could determine his death.

"But three years on and after the doctors gave their reports I still do not have a ruling from the coroner. Why do I have to wait so long to find out how my son died? They should be ashamed of themselves because they have kept a mum in the dark. The coroner has not had the decency to write and tell me what is going on."

One of the two men who were interviewed by police in connection with Wayne's death but were later released without charge, was found dead on January 24, 2009.

Mrs Greenidge said she was mortified when she discovered this man's inquest had been and gone.

She said: "I asked his mother if she had had an inquest into her son's death and she said 'yes' and was shocked to find out that the inquest into my son's death was still not concluded."

The grandmother of 14 said she has no other choice but to ask her solicitor to use whatever means necessary to get a decision from the coroner. She added: "My solicitor has spoken to a barrister and they are looking into pursuing other legal avenues including a judicial review putting pressure on the coroner to fulfil her duty. No one has forgotten what happened to my son and no one knows why."

A fax was sent to Ms Cobb's office by the Isle of Thanet Gazette asking why Mr Greenidge's inquest has not resumed, but at the time of going to press no response had been received.

Mrs Greenidge added: "I have to walk past the spot where my son died every day on my way to the shops and it is a constant reminder to me. I need to know how my son died. Why can't they see that?"




CLEGG William H 1953+

NUTHALL Stanley 1955-57+

SISSONS Jim 23/Nov/1964+


If anyone should have any further information, or indeed any pictures or photographs of the above licensed premises, please email:-