"Letters of Little Value"
Page 37
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Q UPP 0 RT I N G letters from customers
produced by the applicants did not state in terms what work they wanted done, which was the reason why the Transport Tribunal said that letters were of little value.
The Yorkshire Deputy Licensing Authority, Mr. J. H. A. Randolph, said this at Leeds on Monday, when he refused to grant a B licence for two 3-ton vehicles to Mr. C. Heath, Leeds, on documentary evidence alone, The British Transport Commission objected. Mr. Heath told the Authority that he needed work for hire or reward when his own business as a manure merchant was slack. His previous B licence for three vehicles had lapsed in March, 1956, through an oversight. Mr. R. A. Webb, for the B.T.C., said that no figures had been produced of the work done under the previous licence. The applicant had had a chequered history, said Mr. Randolph. After his failure to renew his licence in March, 1956, he was granted a shortterm B licence in May, and at the hearing of the substantive application in September he failed to appear and it was refused.
A further application for a short-term E licence was also refused, and he was giVen a .short-term C licence. In February, 1957, a new B application was refused for want of evidence. If he wanted a licence, he must find witnesses, and the case would be adjourned to give him a last chance.