South Eastern Excursion and Tours Bid Refused
Page 13
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A CONTINENTAL tours organizer,
which sought an excursion and tours licence because, it was alleged, vehicles supplied in the past by Southdown Motor Services Ltd. were unsuitable and other losal operators were not licensed to cater for the applicant's needs, bad its application refused by the South Eastern Traffic Commissioners last week at Brighton because of a lack of supporting witnesses.
Mr. E. C. James, making the application on behalf of Regency Tours of Brighton. said that his company specialized in day trips to the Continent. Only Southdown was able to carry the company's clients between Brighton and various airports and seaports but, Mr. James contended, coaches supplied on two occasions had arrived late and, because of excessive engine noise and vibration, were unsatisfactory from the point of view of passenger comfort.
"We found that Southdown's service was not as good as we had been accustomed to", he continued, "and were so disgusted with the low standard of coach that we decided to apply for our own licence so that we can choose our own operators. In all honesty we do not wish to deal with Southdown again."
Mr. James said that his company wished to use, in the future, petrol or light diesel-engined coaches, which were essential to Minimize sickness, which was a real problem with young children and old people.
Holding up a copy of The Commercial Motor, Mr. James said that tests described had proved that vibration and noise were much less in petrol-engined coaches than in heavy diesel-engined vehicles.
If the 10 destinations sought were granted, the intention was to use five local operators. There would be no incursion into tours operated by existing operators.
Cross-examined by Mr. J. R. C. SamuelGibbon for Southdown and several other objectors, Mr. James agreed that the coach he was complaining of was a "brand new" 49-seater Leyland model.
Asked if he was serious in his contentions, Mr. James replied: "I took the ride myself. I cannot say it was comfortable. The engine noise and vibration were such that you could see the sides of the coach vibrating. The gear-change was also bad". It was just "not good enough".
After a series of questions put by Mr. Samuel-Gibbon with regard to existing licensed facilities, Mr. James agreed that services existed that could transport clients to embarkation points.
Mr. H. J. Thom, the chairman, after being told that no witnesses were to be called to support the applicant, refused the application. "I myself know all about these vehicles. The Commissioners cannot, without strong evidence, support your contention that the latest type of Leyland coach is unsuitable."
[Mr. G. Duckworth, traffic manager of Southdown, told The Commercial Motor that the vehicle concerned was one of the company's newest Leyland Leopard, with air suspension and fitted with a Harrington body.]
Editorial note
The article referred to by Mr. lames— although he did not read it out—was one entitled "A Diesel Coach For Mel ", written by the Technical Editor, in the November 2 issue of this journal. This article, in which a diesel coach and a petrol-engined coach were compared, said that one was "as quiet and smooth" as the other. There was little to choose between the amount of engine noise heard, both being very quiet, although taken generally the diesel coach was quieter, the article continued.