Walker Gains Three Vehicles on New Application B Y a decision
Page 24
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
of the Northern Deputy Licensing Authority, given last Friday, Mr. 1-L L. Walker, of Thornabyon-Tees, whose fleet was drastically reduced by the Appeal Tribunal; regained three of the vehicles, that he lost by the Tribunal's ruling. In addition, he secured the authorization under A licences of vehicles that had previclusly been granted B licences.
Originally Mr. Walker applied for A licences for 22 vehicles (624 tons), one articulated vehicle (3 tons 19 cwt.) and one trailer (14 tons), and B licences for seven vehicles (16i tons). He was granted A licences for 11 vehicles (264 tons), and B licences for 19 vehicles (48 tons 12 cwt.) and one trailer (14 tons).
The Appeal Tribunal reduced the fleet to seven vehicles, including one articulated (20 tons), under an A licence, and nine vehicles (25 tons) and one trailer (II tons) under a B licence. Mr. Walker was thus left with 16 vehicles and one trailer (a total of 464 tons).
Last week a new application was heard by the Northern Deputy Licensing -• Authority, the case occupying nearly three days. Mr. Walker applied for an A licence for 16 vehicles (384 tons) in possession, one trailer (24 tons), and five vehicles (18 tons) to be acquired —a total of 21 vehicles and one trailer, He was granted an A licence for 19 vehicles (504 tons) and one trailer (24 tons). That part of the application referring to two vehicles (6 tons) was refused. Mr. Walker now has three more vehicles than the Tribunal allowed and all are on an A licence—a substantial victory. The application was virtually one for 16 additional vehicles to be acquired, although they had, in fact, been operated under defence permits.
Seventeen Witnesses were called in support of the application and the L.N.E. Railway Co. was the only objector. For the railway company, it was stated that in the 16 weeks ended April 19 last, railway traffic in the north-eastern area had declined by 13.1 per cent.
Mr. G. W. Duncan, the Deputy Licensing Authority, pointed out that the Appeal Tribunal's decision was final and binding. He considered that it was not competent for him to review the Tribunal's decision in connection with vehicles acquired during the war by Mr. Walker from two other operators.
Mr. Duncan found as fact that Mr. Walker was mainly engaged in shortdistance haulage before the war, although he had done some long-distance work. There had been a substantial increase in Mr. Walker's long-dis
tance haulage during the war. The applicant had proved that there were persons ready and willing to employ him and that the haulage work which he proposed to do could not be satisfactorily handled by other existing road Cr rail operators.
There had also been an increase in the business of Mr. Walker's regular customers, and a definite improvement in trade and industry in the district. The railway facilities were not suitable, and all Mr. Walker's vehicles in possession were, in the main, fully employed white they were licensed.
Mr. Duncan emphasized that he drew no inference from the fact that no road hauliers objected to the application. He allowed three vehicles for maintenance purposes.