AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Warrington haulier granted one out of two

16th October 1970
Page 40
Page 40, 16th October 1970 — Warrington haulier granted one out of two
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?

• An application by F. Wardell (Haulage) Ltd, of Warrington, which was heard at a public inquiry in Manchester on Tuesday, was only partly successful. Mr C. R. Hodgson, the North Western LA, decided that there was not enough evidence to justify a full grant.

The application, which was objected to by BR and BRS, was to add two flat articulated trailers to the current B licence but as there was no evidence to prove that the objectors would or would not be affected by an increase in the applicant's fleet strength, Mr Hodgson was prepared to consider only one addition.

Mr J. A. Backhouse, for the applicant company, said that the trailers would be used to carry container traffic for organizations such as Cunard Line, Manchester Liners and Canadian Pacific Ships.

Mr J. S. Lawton, representing IRS, said that as both objectors were carrying container traffic and the applicant company could produce no witnesses to support the application, the application should not be granted.

For British Railways, Mr G. Clayton, pointed out that the applicant had recently been allowed to add six trailers to its fleet.

When asked by Mr Lawton why witnesses supporting the application were not present, Mr J. R. Phipps, joint managing director of the company, replied that he felt they were not necessary as they had been present at the previous hearing and letters of support had been produced.

On making his decision, Mr Hodgson said that as no witnesses had been called to prove whether the objectors would be affected, he would have to rely on witnesses present at previous hearings and letters of support provided.