TOO RESTRICTIVE SO FARMER WINS APPEAL
Page 44
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
iN APPEAL by a Bishop Auckland farmer against a decision by Northern LA Mr. J. A. T. Hanlon was upheld by the Transport Tribunal this week. The appellant, Mr. F. M. Stobart, had applied for a variation of his B licence to extend the radius for two customers to 35 miles; Mr. Hanlon had granted 10 miles.
While in business as a farmer, Mr. Stobart carried goods for neighbouring farmers on an F licence. Two of his farmer customers, Mr. Roy Watson and Mr. W. Thwaites, were also cattle dealers and livestock could not be carried on the F licence.
To regularize the position Mr. Stobart applied for a B licence last February. This was granted and included livestock for Watson and Thwaites within 10 miles.
This condition proved too restrictive for both the appellant and his customers. The vehicle earnings dropped from £2,707 a year to an estimated £1,680. And a proportion of the traffic passed to another operator, J. D. Alsop.
Mr. Stobart applied for a variation of the licence to obtain a 100-mile radius for these customers. One objector, J. Heseltine and Son, agreed to withdraw if the radius was reduced to 35 miles.
Mr. R. M. Yorke, who represented the appellant, told the Tribunal that his client had agreed to the reduced radius. He submitted that this removed one objector.
Mr. Yorke also submitted that as Mr. Alsop was now working for the appellant's customers he could not be regarded as having an objection. "The LA was waxing eloquently and angrily and looks to have made up his mind in advance", said Mr. Yorke.
The Tribunal took the view that as one objector had agreed that he would not be affected by a 35-mile grant and the other did only long-distance operation, they would be correct in allowing the appeal.
The respondents were not represented in court.