AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Railways Suspicious of Hauliers' Working Agreement

10th February 1939
Page 56
Page 56, 10th February 1939 — Railways Suspicious of Hauliers' Working Agreement
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?

TIIE , railways are apparently • • suspicious that something irregular is happening," said Mr. D. Skelding, at Birmingham, last Friday, when he explained to Dr. W. Dawson Sadler (West Midland Deputy Licensing Authority) the relationship between two ,haulage concerns. One of these has a base at West Bromwich, and the other is established at Grimsby, and they have a working arrangement under which each uses the other's office, for telephonic purposes, and each employs the other for the conveyance of traffic which, it finds it convenient to transfer.

Mr. Skelding was presenting the adjourned application of R. Harrison, Ltd:, of West ' Bromwich, for the renewal of its A licence' The' application Was opposed by the railways, said Mr. Skelding, on the strength of an alleged material change of business • a22 since the company came into being in August, 1936, when it took over the business of Messii. R. Harrison, of King's Heath. "

In February, 1937, R. Harrison, Ltd., took dyer the btisiness of Messrs. L. T. , Powell, of West Bromwich, without the formality of a public inquify, and in August, 1937, it sought to replace two small vehicles by a larger one. The application was granted.

Mr. Skelding explained that Mr. Henry ROssington, managing .dire'aor of R. Harrison, Ltd:., was also in the directorate, I of ,Grinisby Rolidirays, Ltd., which did a large amount -9f• sub-contracting: . Mr. Rossington, in evidence, explained th_at the policy of Grimsby. 'Roadways, Ltd., before the re-formation of ,the company in 1936, had been one Of indiscriminate subcontracting, which was unsatisfactory.

Its new policy was to co-ordinate, so far as possible, all this sub-contracting in one concern—that of R. Harrison, Ltd. The two ebrupanies, said Mr. Rossington, were quite separate.

Mr. Else, for the railways, said that he should strenuously oppose the application unless figures were put in.

After, the decision tp-, adjourn the hearing for the production' of figures, Mr. Else, concluded his Cross-examination ef Mr: Rthsington, ,Nia10..4aid that 99 :per, cent. of the traffic._ ea:tried by R. Harrison, Ltd., for `Grimsby ,Roadways, Ltd.; durinethe paft ttionths had been irnpofted nutS` arid" bolts.

Mr, Harold Charltan,'an offical at !Grimsby Docks, Who Was7c:alle1; bY the „ objectors to give evidenpe of the traffic :carried by It. Harrison, Ltd from the -Xt'ick, said that-. it ivas Grinisby 'Roadways traffic conveyed in the vehicles of R.. Hax-riseri,"_ Ltd


comments powered by Disqus