AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

'No m re Contract A licences for me says Sussex operator

13th January 1967
Page 25
Page 25, 13th January 1967 — 'No m re Contract A licences for me says Sussex operator
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Haulier blames m nufacturers, repair shops, drivers and town planning for GV9s but LA imposes s spension'

66 TT'S been said no such thing as only a bad officer", sai Jackson-Lipkin, add clients at a public enq bourne last week. The R. J. Chapman and Welfare, joint directors of Chapmans Transport Ltd. and Chapmans Transport (Hastings) Ltd., were appearing before the South-Eastern Licensing Authority, Maj.-Gen. A. F. J. Elmslie, in connection with offences under Section 178 of the Act. The LA suspended one of their vehicles for a year.

The LA said that the companies had been charged at a Magistrates' Court on February 28 1966 with using vehicles in a dangerous condition. There was also a record of two convictions in connection with failure to cause records to be kept and a further conviction for using an unauthorized vehicle. fore: there's bad rating, Mr. M. H. essing his iry in Eastclients, Mr. Mr. T. S.

Mr. Chapman told the court that he had acquired a vehicle in 1957, and between then and 1964 he had obtained three Contract A licences. In each case the licence had been terminated due to default on the part of the other party. The consequence of the defaults had fallen on Mr. Chapman as the licence holder. Mr. Chapman told the court that he would never again enter into a Contract A licence agreement.

Divided fleet

The court was told that the two companies jointly operated 12 vehicles and there was an application pending for a further three. Only 'recently had the administration and maintenance of the fleet been divided. Chapmans Transport Ltd., with five vehicles, was based at Pembury and the remaining vehicles were based at a customer's premises at Hastings. Each director had responsibility for one group of vehicles.

The company had always operated a maintenance system but the directors agreed that the system was totally inadequate. The vehicles were serviced on a flat-rate basis by private garages and a part-time mechanic supplemented this system at weekends. Defects Found during the service were not rectified. The flat-rate system had now been dropped and defects were repaired during the service.

Mr. Jackson-Lipkin dealt with each of four immediate GV9s in detail and his client told the court that most of the defects could have been repaired during the service. In other cases the drivers had failed to report obvious defects; and there were, in Mr. Chapman's opinion, defects noted which could have occurred the same day. He did not challenge the issue of the GV9s. In one instance a vehicle was 12 months old when the 0V9 was issued, and Mr. Chapman blamed the manufacturer.

The company had spent £252 16s. trying to rectify the faults on the vehicle.

Until January 1, the company had been unable to acquire suitable premises. Offers had been made for 10 separate premises, including three disused railway stations. In each case the company had either been outbidden or had been refused planning permission.

Mr. Jackson-Lipkin asked the LA to see his clients not as viciously criminally minded men, but as young, successful men who had grown up too quickly. He suggested that theirs was a sin of omission rather than one of commission.

Giving his decision. the LA addressed his remarks to both men, whom he invited to stand before him. He warned them that their future conduct would be considered when their application for renewal of existing licences was heard. He warned that any reappearance before him would have grave consequences.

Suspensions for Grey Motors—and renewal

FOUR VEHICLES and one trailer belonging to Grey Motors Ltd., Bethesda, are to be suspended for two months from February 1, the North-Western Licensing Authority has decided following a Section 178 inquiry (COMMERCIAL MOTOR. January 6).

The company's simultaneous application for renewal of licence has been granted to the extent of nine vehicles and two trailers on A licence, but the LA has decided to withhold authorization of four of these vehicles until two months after the licence renewal date.