Removers face
Page 34
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
the Market by John Darker
Conference votes for prepaid removals
• The prospects and problems of British removers dominated discussions at the Autumn Conference 6f the British Association of Removers at Kenilworth on Monday and Tuesday of tlfis week.
The conference was invited to join "SEDEMAC" • when Mr R. Myer (president) and Madame J. Mouling (director) addressed the meeting. Mr Myer thought that the progress of harmonization in transport might take as long as 30 years. "That doesn't mean we accept this slow development and do nothing more. It means we must work harder to prepare ourselves for the time when the Brussels bureaucracy will give us our objectives."
Raising rates The conference began on the topical note of inflation and after a spirited debate the proposal by the board of management to increase subscription rates by 20 per cent was carried 59-15. To join SEDEMAC would cost the Association some £.1500 — an example of the, necessary costs of effective representation at the Brussels powerhouse of the EEC.
Mr Gilbert Over, president of BAR, said SEDEMAC's membership was confined to national associations — there was no direct membership of any firm or individual. Unless BAR joined SEDEMAC in January, British removers would have no voice in decisions affecting the industry taken by the Brussels administrators.
Mme Mouling said SEDEMAC represented 4000 firms and was in favour of transport liberalization.
Mr Hugh Wilson (general secretary, BAR) asked whether non-members of national associations could operate freely in the Market. Mr Myer said no change in the rules was contemplated. At present non-member firms did operate in the Community but SEDEMAC was the only body for removers that was recognized by the EEC Commission.
Mr Over said that SEDEMAC was keen that the removals industry should be recognized as a distinct entity separate from general haulage and a SEDEMAC committee had made proposals about the qualifications of removers to the Common Market Commission. As members, BAR could contribute substantially to the work of SEDEMAC in improving the status of the industry.
Checking on VAT In a discussion on VAT, following talks by Mr It. Devereux, of HM Customs and Excise and Mr F. J. Smith, of Lep Transport, Mr Evereux said that some firms would get up to 21 months credit on the output tax collected from customers. Customs and Excise officers would inspect sales and purchase invoices frequently, and routine checks might take half a day. If there was a suspicion of malpractice, companies could expect a visit from several inspectors for a period of days.
Replying to a questioner, Mr Smith said the "tax point" for services would be the date of the invoice but all invoices must be rendered within 14 days of the service being performed. There were no exceptions unless by special arrangements with Customs. He envisaged problems in invoices from abroad for transport or warehousing services arising spasmodically. He understood that Customs and Excise will expect to find invoicing being done by all parties on a regular and methodical basis.
Penalty clause When Mr George Bartup spoke on a proposed new form for estimators he suggested that removers should charge customers a penalty for cancelled removals. This could be, say, a quarter of the 'charge for cancellation between 24 and 14 days prior to the booking, one third of the charge for a cancellation within 13 to 8 days and half the charge if under seven days. He also urged that removals should be paid for in advance and that estimate forms should carry a warning to customers that storage charges were liable to an escalation clause. When the conference was asked to vote on these proposals there was a substantial majority against escalation clauses for storage and for any penalties for cancellation of a booked removal. But the meeting was almost unanimously in favour of payment in advance of removals being made a custom of the trade.
Answers, please The feature of BAR conferences in recent years has been a question session and Tuesday's conference was notable for two such sessions, one dealing with overseas transport matters and the other called an "Ideas Workshop" which provided members with an opportunity to pass on money-saving ideas.
In the overseas question time, Mr Tom Ansley (Stuttafords, South Africa), Mr Jack Harley (Grace Bros Removals, Australia) and Mr Ted Philp (Pickfords Overseas) made a very informative panel.
A number, of questions related to the extent of non-BAR members engaged in overseas removals. The panel in general agreed that from 22 to 25 per cent of overseas removals were being undertaken by often small firms of forwarding agents. Sometimes these firms operated from a small office with an effective team of salesmen. The service offered was not always of a high standard. Mr Harley said he had seen a container load of household furniture unpacked in Australia which had had no effective packing or restraint devices at all.
Some helpful hints were given as to necessary precautions with overseas removals, particularly as regards the commonsense of consigning cases or containers to the nearest port in relation to the final designation. Mr Ansley pointed out that though the shipping charge from Southampton to Cape Town or Durban was very similar the overland cost by rail from Cape Town to Johannesburg — to which destination 90 per cent of British immigrants went in SA — was vastly greater, and took very much longer than the 400-mile journey by road-train from Durban.
Particular stress was given by Mr Harley to the stringent requirements of the quarantine authorities in Australia. Even if goods cleared customs easily the quarantine regulations were obligatory. He instanced problems with household furniture and effects with things like antique furniture, golf clubs, lawn mowers, even garden shoes. Such items had to be spotlessly clean and sterile. Any suspicion of old soil etc led the quarantine officers to order the articles to be removed and sterilized.
Mr Ansley amused the conference with his description of common articles in a household removal which could fall foul of the customs authorities. They had strange ideas as to what constituted obscene literature or radical literature and anything appertaining to communism or which discussed race relations was banned, and anything in the nature of a weapon, such as an ornamental sword or dagger, must be specifically packed in a marked case and left at the rear end of the container for customs inspection on arrival.