Cook Refused 12 "Arties" for Steel
Page 45
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AN application by Messrs. Siddle C. Cook, Consett, County Durham, to add 12 articulated vehicles to an A licence was refused by Mr. J. A. T. Hanlon, Northern Licensing Authority, at Newcastle upon Tyne on Tuesday because of lack of customer-evidence.
For the applicants, Mr. T. H. Campbell Wardlaw said that they had tendered successfully to the South Durham Steel and Iron Co., Ltd., to carry 2,300 tons of steel in awkward loads" to the new steel works at Llanwem, Mon. It was mostly out-ofgauge steel which the railways could not carry.
Objections had been received from the British Transport Commission, said Mr. Wardlaw. He had written to the divisional manager of British Road Services asking for particulars of vehicles available to carry girders up to 80 t. long. He also asked if they would be prepared to sub-contract them to Cook.
The reply suggested that Cook and the B.T.C. should meet to discuss the matter at a Road and Rail Negotiating Committee meeting.
Mr. Wardlaw said that he pressed for an answer to his letters, but had heard nothing further.
Mr. S. C. Cook, managing director, said that he had made a fair quotation which would provide an adequate return, but he could not do the work with the number of vehicles he now had. All his vehicles were at present fully employed. He had requested South Durham to send witnesses to the inquiry, but the transport manager refused to attend and sent a letter of support instead. If South Durham started the practice of attending traffic courts, The transport manager would "never be in his office," he was told. .
For the objectors, Mr. J. L. R. Croft suggested that Mr. Cook had mentioned the tender for South Durham at a previous inquiry before the Deputy Authority in February. This had been taken into account when two vehicles had been granted, but that matter was now the subject of appeal, Mr. 'Croft added. Asked why 12 vehicles were necessary. Mr. Cook said that he was asked to carry 400 tons a week.
Mr. Croft submitted that the objectors had no case to answer although he was prepared to call witnesses who had 'come from South Wales. They would tell the Authority of the arrangements the B.T.C. had made to cope with the new work. He contended that the application was altogether out of proportion.
Giving decision, Mr. Hanlon observed that the limited value of supporting letters had been mentioned repeatedly. It was difficult to see how South Durham could avoid their practice of not attending court if they were going to allocate work to a particular haulier, he added. It seemed that the applicants had obtained the work solely on the tender price. If there were a need for additional facilities those who needed it should come forward.
Mr. Wardlaw asked the Authority for his reasons in writing so that a copy could be sent to the South Durham company.