Siddle C. Cook Case Goes Back
Page 37
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
NO road operator had opposed the application of Siddlc C, Cook, Ltd., Consett, Co. Durham, Mr. T. H. Campbell Wardlaw told the Transport Tribunal in London on Tuesday, when the company appealed against the Northern Licensing Authority's refusal Io add an articulated vehicle to their A licence.
The Tribunal ordered that the case be referred back to the Licensing Authority for detailed consideration of certain points.
Mr. Warcilaw said the vehicle had been acquired from another local contractor—Mr. Septimus Cook—who had formerly been a sub-contractor to the company. He was -not now able to do that work and the company were experiencing difficulty in finding other sub-contractors. This difficulty had not been seriously challenged by the British Transport Commission—objectors to the original application and respondents to the appeal.
The vehicle was for goods of exceptional length and there was no evidence of other similar vehicles being available in the vicinity.
" The only objection comes from British Railways, who concede that there obviously must be reasons which dictate the choice as between road and rail transport for the concerns associated with Sidfile Cook," said Mr. Wardlaw.
He described the company's applica tion as a modest one which, if granted, would not adversely affect any other. operator.
Mr. '.1. L. R. Croft, for the B.T.C.; said the appellants had quoted extensive sub-contracting figures related to work for the Consett Iron Co., yet these figures were never the basis of the original application.. Even so, there had been nothing-to show that the subcontractor' vehicle had been used on work for the iron company.
The application was simply on the basis that, as the sub-contractor was no longer able to help them, the company were inconvenienced. But be suggested there was no evidence of inconvenience.
The case was referred back to the Licensing Authority for further consideration confined to what the president-of the Tribunal, Mr. Hubert Hull, described as "the Septimus Cook aspect of the matter."
This consideration, said Mr. Hull, should relate to the " disappearance" of Septimus Cook as a carrier 01 steel of extreme length on behalf of Sithile C. Cook. It should reveal the dates on which he operated vehicles capable of carrying these extreme lengths, the quantity he hauled as sub-contractor, and whether, when there were changesin the size of his fleet, there was arty change in the actual operational side of the business.