AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Why no take-over?

16th August 1968, Page 29
16th August 1968
Page 29
Page 29, 16th August 1968 — Why no take-over?
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?

Yorks commissioners ask

• The reason for an application not having been submitted for the purchase of the business and goodwill of a Mr. S. Bingley, deceased in January or February, and who had held an excursions and tours licence starting from Hemsworth, was of concern to the Yorkshire Traffic Commissioners sitting at Leeds on Tuesday. So said the chairman Mr. H. E. Robson.

The matter arose during the hearing of an application by P. Bingley, trading as W. R. and P. Bingley, to introduce additional day excursions to London (Wembley), Coventry and Stratford upon Avon, and Gretna Green, and to add to the licence additional picking-up points at Market Place and Cross Hill, Hemsworth. The applicant has an excursions and tours licence starting from Ford Street, Kinsley, authorizing 59 excursions.

The only objection received to the additional excursions was from British Rail, to London (Wembley), and this had since been withdrawn; after hearing Mr. H. Richardson, for the applicant, the chairman indicated that this part of the application would be granted.

The second part was objected to by H. Pemberton (Coaches) Ltd. and Mrs. M. E. Bingley (as legal personal representative of the late Mr. S. Bingley) for whom Mr. J. E. Harrison appeared. Pemberton, authorized for excursions and tours from Upton and South Kirkby, was stated to have made an approach and agreed a price for the S. Bingley business.

The chairman said it was in the public interest that Hemsworth should be properly served and asked about the prospects of an early application being made for take-over of the late S. Bingley's business; he was concerned as to why Pemberton could not proceed.

He said the commissioners had in mind

to adjourn the second part until they had before them an application by anyone applying to take over that business, to enable the commissioners to see what use was being made of the licence. Following assurance that the applicant agreed to the proposal, the second part was adjourned sine die, on the understanding that Pemberton made application for a take-over and that this was disposed of before the second part was considered.

Mr. Harrison said it was hoped Pemberton would take over the whole of the Bingley business on terms already agreed, provided the second part of this application was refused, otherwise revision would be necessary. During 1968 60 excursions had been run under the Bingley licence with coaches on hire to Pemberton.