1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156 
OPINIONS and QUERIES Clearing Houses and Their Commission.
Page 95
Page 96
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Editor, TEE COMMERCIAL Moo.
[3451] Sir,—We do at times, but not very frequently, have dealings with firms describing themselves as freight or traffic brokers. The .arrangement, as we have always understood, is that they pay owners or firms whose vehicles they use the same rate as they receive less a eommission of 10 per cent.
Recently, near Manchester, one of our vans secured a return load to the South Coast through the agency of one of these firms. We were not, however, satisfied with the rate and wrote •them accordingly, to which we did not get a satisfactory reply. We then wrote to the manufacturers whose goods we actually carried, informing them as to the rate we were receiving, and we have now received a letter which reads as follows :-- "In reply to your letter re haulage rate on paint to . . . we have to say that we are paying Messrs. . . . a higher rate than the one quoted by you."
As we tal‘e your paper each week we are writing for your advice. PUZZLED. Bognor.
"[The amount payable to you by the traffic brokers depends' upon the terms of the agreement between yourselves and themselves under which you accepted the goods for conveyance to the south coast. ;Assuming that nothing was put into writing and that nothing was said as to the rate of payment, the question of the amount would appear to depend upon what could be proved to be the recognized custom in such cases. If you can ascertain the haulage rate paid by the consignors to the .brokers and can prove a custom by which the brokers are entitled to retain 10 per cent., and that, in fact, they have retained more than that amount, you would be entitled to sue'lthem for the difference.
lithe brokers deliberately misled you as to the amount they received from the consignors in order to retain more than they were entitled to they may have rendered themselves liable to criminal proceedings, but unless the case were abundantly clear against them you could not he advised to start such proceedings, or to make any suggestion that they had been guilty of an offence as by so doing you might expose yourselves to proceedings for defamation.—En.]
Should He Buy an Oil-engined Vehicle ?
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3452] Sir,—Please give me your advice on this haulage problem :—I work two Ford 30-cwt. twinwheeled tipping lorries for carting road metal, gravel and sand in the locality, but convey building material and cement for fairly long distances. In the season I carry sugar-beet and corn for farmers, whilst there are occasional loads of furniture and machinery.
I have sufficient haulage for more lorries. Will it
pay me best to operate only Fords or to buy a new 5.6-tonner of good make? Can two light lorries do 'the work of one large one at approximately the same cost?
Should you recommend the larger lorry, do you think that one with an oil engine would be better than the petrol type? I feel sure that I would know how to handle the oil engine.
• Would the oil engine have a shorter life or its workineparts need often replacing? Thank you for your valued journal which has been a great help to me.
Stamford. G. PA/ITER.
[It is nearly always cheaper to use the size of vehicle which will carry the .maximum load. There are certain exceptions, but your case does not appear to be one of them. On the basis of a 400-mile week, for example, each • of your 30-cwt. lorries will cost, all in, approximately £9 per week to operate. Four of them would therefore cost 12,8 per week, as against the £20 total operating cost of a 8-ton lorry.
For the beet haulage which you mention, I am quite sure it would be impossible to make 30-cwt. lorries pay.
As regards the question of an oil engine. I do not anticipate that the working parts of these power units would need replacement any more frequently than those of a petrol engine, hut, on general grounds, taking into consideration your circumstances, I would advise you, for the time being at any rate, to stick to petrol. The oil engine is in a stage of development, and but little is as yet known concerning its ultimate maintenance and other costs. Owners of fleets have better facilities for carrying out the initial triaLs and can afford to be more patient—S.T.R.1 Insuring for Private Hire Work.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3453] Sir,—I have a car, a four-seater, which I am proposing to let out on hire, the hirer driving. It is insured for this class of work, but there is an excess of £5 on the policy.
Could you please suggest a suitable wording for an agreement between me and any hirer of the car, so that I am covered against any claim which might be made against me and which would be repudiated by
the insurance company. HAMPSHIRE. Isle of Wight.
[It appears to us that, having regard to the provisions of the Road Traffic Act, it is no longer permissible for the owner of a motor vehicle to be insured against third-party risks under a policy which provides that the insured shall himself be liable for the first £5 of any damage for which a third party is entitled to claim against the insured.
The Act provides that it shall not be lawful for any person to use, or permit any other person to use, a motor vehicle on a road unless there is in force in relation to the user of the vehicle by that person or that other person, as the case may be, such a policy of insurance in respect of third-party risks as complies with the require
meats of the Act. Any agreement between yourself and tha hirer relieving you from full responsibility under the Act would be illegal. We suggest that you take the matter up with your insurance company.—En.] Carrying a Railway Lift Van by Road.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3454] Sir,—Will you please inform me as to what I should charge for hauling three miles out an 800 cubic ft. lift van, waiting six hours for it to be loaded, and return to rail. We propose doing this with a 5-ton lorry, also with a 600 cubic ft. van within half a mile radius, four hours loading time, and return to rail. I enclose stamped addressed envelope for your
reply. LANCE AND SONe Lymington,
[The first of the two jobs mentioned in your inquiry is, to all intents and purposes, a day's work and should be charged accordingly. The price you should get to bring you a minimum reasonable gross profit is £2 5s. The other job can be completed in half a day and the charge should be accordingly 25s.
The size of the lift van does not affect the matter, since you propose in both eases to employ a 5-ton vehicle, to the use of which the foregoing figures apply.—S.T.R.] Long or Short-distance Work ?
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3455] -Six,—Although I have been a reader of your valuable journal for only a short time, I will be very pleased if you can advise me on the following:—A friend and I are contemplating the Purchase of a 1-2-ton motor lorry, with which we intend to do haulage work, preferably long-distance. Could you tell us which pays best—long or short-distance work, give us an idea as to how to go about getting contracts, and send us a copy of your Tables of Operating Costs?
Edgware. H. DuNcomBE.
[There are no real answers to your questions. Long-distance work is just as likely to be profitable as short
distance and vice-versa. Most hauliers having lightweight vehicles, such as the type you are contemplating, And short-distance work better because on long distance the rates are usually such that only large vehicles are profitable. On the other hand, if the work is not such as to involve overspeeding or overloading, operating costs on the latter class of work are somewhat easier, because of the saving in maintenance.
The only practicable way of obtaining contracts is by personal canvass in your own district. You would be well advised to make some inquiries before you invest in the vehicle, but after you have bought it, it is better to make those inquiries in company with the vehicle, as an indication of the type of machine you are offering.— S.T.R.]
A Summons for Carrying a Loader.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[34561 Sir,—I am the driver of a 2-ton lorry which carries a full comprehensive insurance policy. I make journeys at so much per mile for the concern by which I am employed, and if there are several deliveries I pick anyone I may know or who is recommended to be trustworthy and pay him to come on the journey to help unload. On a recent occasion I had with me a person well known to me and I was stopped by the police and explained why the said person was riding with me, but I have received a summons. Could you
give me an opinion on this? A.C. Bristol.
[We have placed your letter and the summons before our legal adviser, who. expresses the following opinion :— In this ease the defendant is summoned for using a motor lorry in relation to which it is said that there was net in force such a policy of insurance in respect of third. party risks es complied with the requirements of the Road Traffic Act.
D42
The facts appear to be that the defendant is the owner of a lorry ; that he is a haulage contractor who conveys goods for a concern at so much per mile ; that when, as on the day in question, he has several deliveries to make he engages temporarily someone who" is known, or recommended, to him to assist him with the deliveries, and he pays that person for' his services. The defendant has a full comprehensive -insurance policy, which I assume covers third-party risks. I am unable to understand on what ground it is suggested that any offence has been committed, but for the purpose of advising the .defendant, I can only assume -that it will be suggested that, at the time in question, he was not covered by his policy because the certificate of insurance shows on the face of it that the' vehicle is insured as a goods-carrying vehicle, and that in addition to carrying goods the defendant was carrying the person who was helping him. That view, if it be put forward, is quite without justification.
The person who was carried on the lorry was not being carried as a passenger in such a way as to entitle the insurance company to repudiate liability if an accident occuried, on the ground that the vehicle was being used otherwise than far the conveyance of goods. The person carried was not a passenger, but was in exactly the same legal position as a driver's mate, or van boy, who is regularly employed to go around with the driver to assist in delivering goods.
It was not necessary that the policy should cover liability to persons carried on the vehicle except in certain ca,ses. Section 36 (1) provides that a policy shall not be required to cover liability in respect of the death arising out of and in the course of his employment of a person in the employment of the person insured by the polity, or of bodily injury sustained by such a person arising out of and in the course of his employment. In the present case there can be no doubt but that the person who was carried was in the employment of the defendant at the time when he was on the vehicle. Nor need the policy cover liability in respect of the death of or bodily injury to persons who. are being carried in the vehicle which is the subject of the policy, except in the case of a vehicle in which passengers are carried for hire or reward, or "by reason of or in pursuance of a contract of employment." The meaning of those words is somewhat obscure, but it is clear that they cannot apply to -the case of a. person who is employed by the owner of the lorry, and to whom the Act definitely states the insurance need not apply."
We would point out that it is essential-that you should attend at the Court in order to contest the case.
We suggest that unless you are represented by a solicitor you should ask the Clerk to the Magistrates to be good enough to read this letter.—En.]
The Responsibility for Damage Caused by Overloading.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3457] Sir,—We were employed by a local firm to convey 2 tons 15 cwt. of machinery for a distance of 70 miles; we supplied a 2+-ton vehicle. The driver, being a new employee, did his best in the circumstances, but was unfortunate enough to break both flexible couplings and burn out clutch discs, necessitating a mechanic travelling a distance of 60 miles to replace clutch and couplings. On weighing the load, it was found to be 4 tons 11 cwt. 2 qrs.
Can we claim on the consignors for overloading the vehicle, as we consider they knew the approximate weight? LADEN. Bristol.
[We consider that a claim against the consignors of the machinery for damages due to this negligence should succeed, unless the judge, after hearing the whole of the evidence, should come to the conclusion that the driver should have realized that the vehicle was being overloaded to such an extent as to make it reasonable for him to make further inquiry as to the weight before starting on the journey. If the judge came to such a conclusion he might bold that the driver had been guilty of contributory negligence, which would disentitle you from recovering damages.
We strongly advise that a claim should be made against , the consignors, but it would be as well to 'place the whole of the facts before a local solicitor before proceedings in the County court are commenced.—En.]