AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

On The Merchandise Trail

10th March 1961, Page 56
10th March 1961
Page 56
Page 56, 10th March 1961 — On The Merchandise Trail
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?

Keywords :

The Scramble for Return Loads is On

ANOTHER London transport concern has decided to follow the lead of Merchandise Transport and Arnold Transport (Rochester), Ltd. This time it is H.M.W. Transport, Ltd., of Bancroft Road, Stepney, who have applied for the whole of their 123-ton fleet—eight artics, 19 vans and one drop-side lorry —to be transferred from contract A to A licence. The H.M.W. fleet has been operating for five or six years exclusively for W. Steel and Co., furniture manufacturers, although unlike the .Merchandise-Harris Lebus set-up, H.M.W. are an independcnt concern, quite unconnected with W. Steel and Co.

It is not, however, the fact of the application so much as the reason behind it that makes the news. For it points to a trend that in spite of assurances from some quarters, is likely to become a very real threat to independent hauliers, like other operators all over the country, have recently applied for a new contract incorporating increased

rates. It is understood that they received a reply indicatin that they should follow the Merchandise lead: in short, app] for A licences and start to carry return loads. Then. instea of asking for increased rates for the furniture haulage, the would be able to offer reduced rates.

"We have no option," said an H.M.W. official. Oi overheads are going up all the time—rent, rates, wage insurance, and so on—and either we get our rates increased c we do something about the sheer waste of empty running aft making deliveries to Scotland and Northern towns:' The H.M.W. application will come before 'the Metropolita Licensing Authority, Mr. D. 1, R. Muir, but it will obvious] not be considered before Mr. Muir has decided the size of th Merchandise grant—and he is not likely to do that until aftt publication of the Transport Tribunal's reasons for the decision in the Merchandise and Arnold cases.


comments powered by Disqus