Lorry Weight Increased: Special A Licence Revoked
Page 32
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
nBSERWNG that he would be failing in his duty if be did not revoke a special A licence for a vehicle with a registered unladen weight of 5f tons—but increased to 7 tons 19 cwt.—Mr. J. A. T. Hanlon, Northern Licensing Authority, at Penrith, last week, went further when he nullified another application seeking to license a substitute vehicle. The operators concerned were J. Stamper and Co. (Haulage), Ltd., Penrith.
When the inquiry was opened in January, the company's managing director, Mr. John Stamper, explained that the vehicle, originally a six-wheeler, had been equipped with an extra front axle to increase its capacity from 12 to 16 tons. He believed it was not necessary to declare a change in weight to the Licensing Authority, but only to the excise authority, which he had done.
Discussion took place, at the time, between Mr. T. H. Campbell Wardlaw, on behalf of the company, and Mr. Hanlon, on whether the description of a goods vehicle on the statutory form was a declaration of intention to use it at that weight. The case had then been adjourned, pending a Transport Tribunal decision on a similar case.
At the resumed hearing last week Mr. Campbell Wardlaw referred to the Tribunal's finding—in the case of George Allinson—that the statutory description
was a declaration of intention. The Authority, he said, had the power either to revoke the licence or suspend it, but revocation would be harsh.
Misguided But Honest Mr. Stamper, said Mr. Wardlaw, might have been misguided in his views, but he had acted in good faith. As soon as the company had realized something was wrong, they had taken steps to regularize it, and an application to substitute a vehicle of the correct weight was before the Authority at that time. "
Reviewing the case, Mr. Hanlon said the concern acquired a special A licence in 1955, when a vehicle of 51 tons unladen weight was bought from British Road Services, An application for the licence to be " transferred " to another vehicle had been granted in May, 1956. Later that year the modification to the second vehicle had been made and, since then, until an application was made in November, 1958, for a public A licence, with surrender of the special A. the heavier vehicle had been operated.
When the application was made, the difference was noted and the company were asked for an explanation. Although, as Mr. Stamper had said, there was nothing in the regulations to say the Licensing Authority should be notified, there was nothing also to say that a carrier should not steal the goods of his customers or cheat or defraud:
Mr. Hanlon said the company had deliberately set out to increase the carrying capacity without notifying the Authority. "This is a fraud upon all hauliers who operate properly under licence, and I would be failing in my duty if I did not revoke this licence and nullify the application for substitution."