More B.M.M.O. Vehicles Granted for M1 Services to London
Page 44
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THEapplications by the Birminghamand Midland Motor Omnibus Co.,
Ltd., for more vehicles on motorway service (The Commercial Motor, March 4 and 18), have been granted in a written decision by the West Midland Traffic Commissioners.
For their Coventry to London service, the company were granted a minimum of two vehicles and a maximum of four vehicles per day to allow some measure of duplication. The application had been for four vehicles on each of five timings.
On the Birmingham to London service, they were granted two vehicles on each timing, so that a total of six on each timing will be available. Special allowances were made for Saturdays in April, August Bank Holiday and other holidays.
The applications had sought an increase in the vehicle allowance to six on any one timing except that eight might be used on Saturdays in June, July, August and September.
The Commissioners granted in full an application for increases in the vehicle allowance for existing intermediate services, But they said the capacity asked for in the Coventry application was far in excess of the existing terminal traffic between Coventry and London. They concluded there was a need for a limited service.
No Restriction They laid down no separate restriction on vehicle allowance per departure so as to give the applicants as much flexibility as possible in the use of duplicate vehicles.
Referring to the Birmingham application, the Commissioners said: "The main difficulty in the present operation of the motorway service is that it commenced to operate during the winter months when the combined vehicle allowance was at its lowest level of four vehicles per day.
"This combined vehicle allowance will now rise progressively to a peak of 30 for August Bank Holiday Saturday and, judged against this background, some of the present difficulties will disappear."
Referring to the evidence at the hearings, the Commissioners said: "Mr. Samuel-Gibbon, for the B.T.C., claimed that the evidence did not justify the grant of the application but that if we decided to make a grant then road fares should be brought into line with rail. We have carefully considered this matter. If the B.T.C. regarded the question of parity of fares as one of prime importance the point should have been raised on the first Birmingham to London motorway application. We are not satisfied that on merit the case for parity of fares has been proved, but in any event it would be wrong to introduce markedly different treatment for Coventry as compared with Birmingham."
No Coastal Traffic On representations made by Mr. John Else, the Commissioners commented: "We accept that the evidence placed before us was based on facilities for Coventry to London and Birmingham to London and return, and while we have decided not to attach any restrictive condition to the additional vehicles granted we should expect the company to refrain from any positive action in using those vehicles for traffic between Birmingham and south coast resorts."
Another point related to the part of the applicant company's case . which rested upon a reduction in railway facilities.
"We think that the emphasis which was given to this point justifies our final conclusion that, the grants we now make should not be regarded as permanent. in the usual sense but should be open to review if, and when, there is any marked increase in the relative railway services."