AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

22-vehicle contract . . . NO licences M O'SHEA AND SON

11th August 1967, Page 24
11th August 1967
Page 24
Page 24, 11th August 1967 — 22-vehicle contract . . . NO licences M O'SHEA AND SON
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?

LTD. obtained • a contract from Sir Robert McAlpine and Son Ltd. requiring 22 vehicles daily—but had its application for a sixvehicle B licence refused by Metropolitan LA Mr. D. I. R. Muir this week.

The company had traded as M. O'Shea, operating six vehicles without a licence. Two vehicles were engaged on site work; the others were working for several large public works contractors.

Mr. O'Shea, managing director of the new company, told the LA that the most recent of these was Willment and Co. Ltd. and that neither that company nor the other contractors had ever asked to see his carrier's licence.

He was applying because his accountant had advised him to put his house in order. "If I had done so before," he said, "I would have been a rich man today." The £4,000 shares of the company are held jointly by Mr. and Mrs. O'Shea.

The McAlpine contract—expected to run for a considerable period—was to transport excavated material from London (Heathrow) Airport to a tip at Feitham, and return with ballast. Mr. M. Thorpe, for O'Shea, asked him if he could not have continued to operate illegally since McAlpine had not asked to see his licence. Mr. O'Shea explained that MoT inspectors were in constant attendance at this site and at many others around London.

Mr. O'Shea said he could obtain sufficient tippers to make up the balance between the six he was seeking to licence and the 22 he required for the contract. But there was no supporting evidence.