Furniture removing
Page 66
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
a la carte BY FRANK BURRAVOE
IN CALEDONIA'S Campbeltown is Marlin's Transport. Mr. Marlin has a furniture van on a B licence with the following, namely Scottish, conditions:—
G roceries. household and agricultural requisites, school meals, mid-day meals for old folks and biscuits in bulk to retailers and furniture removals, within a radius of 20 miles of operating centre. Christmas parcel mail on behalf of the Postmaster General within a radius of 20 miles of operating centre.
Having found the 20 miles restriction for furniture removals irksome, he applied a short time ago to alter it, with the seemingly innocuous but really far-reaching wording "furniture and household effects to and from places within a radius of 20 miles" (to which he added, as an apparent afterthought, "but only in Scotland"). This brought three objections: from Transport Holding Company (Pickfords Ltd.), West Coast Motor Services Company and Archibald McFadyen and Sons. It also brought an appeal— against refusal of the proposed variation.
A curious story of human interest with national undertones was unfolded when the application was heard. Mr. McFadyen, it came out, is the only haulier in Campbeltown who removes furniture beyond the Marlin radius. But he has no furniture van; he uses cattle floats for the purpose. And a worthy councillor of Campbeltown described that arrangement as unsatisfactory. Not only was it impossible to remove the smell of cattle, even with cleansing, he said, but the cattle trucks were open, and being higher than furniture vans, were difficult to load. Moreover, because Mr. McFadyen employed only a driver on the removal jobs, customers had to assist in loading.
For those who wish to have a furniture removal outside the Marlin radius "of a higher grade than that provided by Mr. McFadyen", as the Transport Tribunal delicately put it, the nearest source is Pickfords at Oban, 90 miles from Campbettown. But a supporting witness for Marlin, who got estimates for his removal, found Pickfords more expensive, although Pickfords said (and the LA accepted this statement) they did not charge for the dead mileage. However, the Transport Tribunal rejected the Marlin appeal (June 4). In the Tribunal's view the Campbeltown area is better served than some others, because customers have the choice of two grades of service, each satisfactory in its own way.
This little cautionary tale, so seemingly simple, has national implications, for it illustrates some of the many licensing problems inherent in the business of furniture removing. It also comes at a time when the Government, having had second thoughts about what it calls household furniture removals, exempted them from the proposed quantity licensing at a late stage during the consideration of the Transport Bill; and when the National Association of Furniture Warehousemen and Removers has expressed concern at the intended freeing of vehicles under 30ewt unladen from quantity licensing, because that freedom, the Association believes, will encourage the entry of newcomers, many with unsuitable vehicles. (Some of the older hands in the Association, mindful perhaps of their own ancestry, may recall the days when nearly one in every two coal merchants undertook furniture removals as a summer sideline.)
Another complication But the use of unsuitable vehicles is only one complicating factor. Another arises from the many guises that the carriage of furniture takes, as innumerable arguments over the years in licensing and appeal courts have bewilderingly emphasized. When that old licensing expression "furniture and household effects" was first minted over 30 years ago, few suspected how it would become devalued. The Labour Government of 1947, when putting through that earlier nationalizing Transport Act, scorned such debased wording when it decided to exempt "ordinary furniture removals" from both the acquisition provisions and those relating to the 25-mile hire or reward distance restriction then imposed. In a typical spasm of highflown officialese, it defined ordinary furniture removals as meaning:—
"the removal of furniture and effects, not being part of the stock in trade of the person to whom they belong, from or to premises occupied by that person to or from other premises occupied by him or to or from a store, not being the store of a person from whom he has recently purchased or hired the furniture or effects or to whom he has sold or is about to sell the fumiture or effects".
Does the description "general goods", in either B licence conditions or A licence normal user embrace furniture removals? Until recently, one would have said decidedly. But doubts have arisen about even this once generally accepted proposition. In the North Western Traffic Area an A haulier who had for years been content with a general goods description to cover his removals work actually applied to revise the wording to "general goods, including household removals, within 10 miles of base; furniture and household effects (excluding household removals) within 45 miles of base". Could confusion become more confounded?
Only part of problem
But household removals are only one part of the problem. New furniture from manufacturers, new and secondhand furniture from stores, antiques, goods taken to and from auction sale rooms, furniture and fittings from schools, offices, works, warehouses and other establishments, theatre scenery and camping equipment, small lots and large lumps, full loads and part loads (and the multifarious types of vehicle used in their conveyance)—all these have caused trouble in the past.
A Metropolitan B licence, that of Evan Cook Ltd., revealed a bit of the medley. One part of the conditions reads: "Furniture and household effects as household removal contractors and warehousemen, office removals, wedding presents, gift furniture, bequests, new furniture as part of a removal or to warehouse, antiques, pictures, fine arts, exhibition furniture and exhibits, statutory". Incidentally, what constitutes "effects" is anybody's guess.
To produce evidence in support of applications for carriers' licences for removals has always been difficult. Because a householder wants to remove only once or twice or so in his life, he is unwilling to give evidence for something he may never need again. This has made entry into the charmed circle difficult. But there are ways and means of getting over the licensing fence. One is to start by carrying new furniture for manufacturers or furniture and effects from sales and auction rooms, customer support for that sort of work being easier to get. And once a licence has been granted, the door is halfopen to extension.
Back loading provides another way in. Under present fatuous official pronouncements, an A licensed haulier, whose authorized normal user may be merely soap or swedes or sows, is fully entitled to carry furniture as return loads.
The Transport Bill and the multitude of new regulations to be made under it will not mend matters. More trials, not fewer, seem to be in store for the furniture fraternity.