AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

8o-mile Radius Too Small

11th June 1937, Page 40
11th June 1937
Page 40
Page 40, 11th June 1937 — 8o-mile Radius Too Small
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 :

CRIPPLING effects of the administration of the Road and Rail Traffic Act were illustrated in a case heard at Manchester, last week, by Sir William Hart, North-Western Deputy Licensing Authority. Mr. William Davies, of Cheadle(on the Manchester boundary), was opposed by the L.M.S. Railway Co. in his application for the removal of an 80-mile radius restricting his haulage for A. C. Fields, Ltd., Ardwick, Manchester.

Mr. P. kershaw, for the L.M.S., said that it was fantastic for a Manchester builder to use a Cheadle haulier for work between Gloucestershire and Huntingdon.

Mr. Howard Robinson, for the applicant, replied that only the River Mersey divided Cheadle from Manchester, and that Mr. Davies had setved A. C. Fields, .Ltd., for 11 years. When ths Act became effective he consented to B-licence restrictions, because he occasionally bought a load of sand, The 80-mile radius fixed a year ago did not now cover the ground made necessary owing to building contracts being secured farther afield every year. The work now in hand comprised roofing for new aerodromes. The loads were composite, plant had to be moved direct from site to site, and all this work, particularly the clearing of sites, was more suitable for road than for rail transport. To send these loads by rail would be• inconvenient and uneconomic.

Decision was reserved.


comments powered by Disqus