A man who suffered life-changing injuries was allegedly dumped on the doorstep of a nightclub by its security staff.

Police called the incident at the Casino Rooms nightclub in Rochester "alarming" and criticised door staff for "serious failings".

The incident is just one of many which have led the force to demand a review of security measures at the Blue Boar Lane nightspot.

The incident is alleged to have taken place early on Sunday, March 13.

A report was eventually made to the police on March 28, which then caused them to put out an appeal for witnesses.

As the man did not know how he became injured, his family got in touch with the club following the incident and were informed although they were not aware of anything of note occurring that night, they would review the CCTV.

The club's management told the family they could not find any record of what happened on the footage except for him being on the doorstep being treated by paramedics.

After the police got in touch with the club, they requested the CCTV and determined it showed the man was involved in an altercation on the club's upstairs dance floor.

A good samaritan carried him down the stairs and into the care of the door staff.

"We believe this subsequent fall outside the premises could have been prevented had the door staff not seemingly ejected him and left him alone on the steps."

Licensing officer PC Dan Hunt explained the CCTV didn't show the man being cared for by the three door staff, rather, he was physically propped up and left on the doorstep "to fend for himself".

He said: "While outside, the victim, who from our understanding would have been intoxicated thus making him even more vulnerable, attempts to stand.

"He attempted to stand and bear weight on his injured leg and understandably that didn't work and it caused him to fall flat on his face potentially causing him to worsen that leg injury and potentially causing a secondary injury to his head.

"We believe this subsequent fall outside the premises could have been prevented had the door staff not seemingly ejected him and left him alone on the steps."

PC Hunt went on to explain it was of the police's view the door staff had been informed by the onlooker what had happened and therefore were aware of the man's condition.

The man was then helped by onlookers outside the club and an ambulance came to his assistance.

However, the ambulance was not called by the venue; a club goer inside the toilets had phone for one after believing they were having a heart attack. They later declined medical help.

The incident was one of many detailed during a meeting to review the licence for the club – which was held at Kent Police's request – today (Tuesday, June 7).

Ahead of the meeting - which had originally been planned for last month - police made public a dossier of 11 incidents which included multiple fights recorded in the car park opposite the club.

There were also alleged incidents in which under-age children who had gone missing visited the gentlemen's club in the building, and another in which a man who was ejected from the club was punched to the ground by two different door staff.

CCTV footage of the latter incident was shown during the meeting, as was footage of the man with a leg injury, after the legal representation for the club argued the footage should be shown to the press and public gathered at the meeting and watching from home on the council's YouTube channel.

PC Hunt told councillors the force was not seeking to revoke the licence, rather, to impose new conditions on it so they could make the venue safer.

These were the introduction of an ID scanner at the door, having door staff patrol the Blue Boar Lane car park, and having them all wear body-worn cameras during their shift.

While the club has agreed to put an ID scanner in place and has already done so on a trial basis, its barrister, Leo Charalambides, argued scanning everyone's IDs would be inappropriate, saying they would prefer to scan everyone who looked under the age of 30.

He also argued police should lay on more patrols at the car park if they wanted to prevent incidents happening there.

The biggest point of contention was the introduction of body-worn cameras; Mr Charalambides said he thought these, along with the ID scanner, would amount to a "blanket surveillance culture", calling the measures "draconian".

Additionally, he argued there was no way of knowing whether the people taking part in the fights in the car park were club goers or if they had been elsewhere.

However, PC Hunt argued door staff could be more accountable for their actions in incidents, such as the man being punched and the other man being removed despite being injured, if they wore the cameras.

A decision by Medway Council's licensing hearing panel will be returned within the next five working days.