AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

TWO LICENCE APPLICANTS WARNED

25th October 1935
Page 69
Page 69, 25th October 1935 — TWO LICENCE APPLICANTS WARNED
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?

Keywords : Truck, Tata Ace

WARNINGS regarding the import ance of observing licence conditions were, on Monday, administered by the Metropolitan Licensing Authority, Mr. Gleeson E. Robinson, to two applicants.

When Messrs. W. W. Drinkwater, 5, Goodson Road, London, N.W.10, applied for the renewal of their licence, Mr. Robinson stated that the firm, who were hauliers of building and road. making materials, had not E observed the condition of their licenee requiring the proper maintenance of vehicles. Fourteen prohibition notices had been imposed in connection with 11 lorries.

For the applicants, it was explained that a number of the older vehicles was being replaced at a total cost of .0,000, and that, on account of the rough work which the fleet carried out: damage was snore likely to be caused than would be the case with normal usage. The firm employed a day and night maintenance staff.

A vehicle .examiner gave eVidexice to the effect that the condition of some of the vehicles was dangerous, although he admitted that repairs had subsequently been made. He agreed that the firm provided proper maintenance facilities, but contended that full advantage was not taken of them.

' Mr. Robinson pointed out that this was a case of the greatest importance. He deferred his decision pending the sobrnission by Messrs. Drinkwater of a suitable scheme of vehicle maintenance to the certifying officer.

Another applicant, who admitted having, on one occasion operated outside the radius permitted under his B licence, and having omitted details of the journey from his record sheet, was severely reprimanded. Mr. Robinson would not accept the applicant's explanation that he construed the condition as meaning that he could pick up goods within a 20-mile radius and carry them beyond that distance, but could not bring goods from points outside the 20-mile radius. The licence was renewed, With a caution as to future conduct.


comments powered by Disqus