AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Double trouble

13th February 1997
Page 24
Page 24, 13th February 1997 — Double trouble
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?

r I hadn't witnessed it with lmy own eyes I would never thought it possible!

Eddie Stobart spelt with a double b?

Surely EVERYONE in the UK knows better.

No, it wasn't on one of his multitudes of wagons, but in CM 9-15 January on page 4.

Tut, tut, Edward would NOT approve.

Des Fiske, West Hanningfield, Chelmsford

Rate for the weight

Tread with interest the artilcle on 94 tonnes in last week's issue (CM 6-12 Feb). The main question that springs to mind, that so far has been avoided by the press, is by how much will rates rise for hauliers run• ning at the new weight?

If it is allowed you can see customers calling for all their regular hauliers to be running at the higher weight—but will they be prepared to pay for it?

I forsee that we'll all be forced to change our tractive units to comply with the extra weight requirements, and not get an extra penny on rates. It will be a case of "if you don't like it—tough".

If it happens, hauliers must stick together and not go to 44 tonnes unless they see an increase.

In some ways this could be the move that allows us to reverse the decline in rates that the industry has witnessed over the past decade. Name and address withheld.

Raw deal

We are fed up with having to accept other European countries imposing restrictions on movement for holidays and weekends, tolls and vignettes while our Government does nothing to counter these restrictions and protect our industry.

The latest "straw" is the news that as an international haulier we are now being banned from transiting France on a Sunday. This is no doubt the compromise made by the French Government after the recent hauliers' strike.

We have no doubt our comments will fall on deaf ears because the public has a low perception of trucks, so supporting transport lobbies does not win many votes for any MP We trust, however, that you may take some of the issues as relevant and perhaps obtain the views of other readers.

LE Sellers, Britannia Freight Services, Hull

Animal crackers

Ihave just read that ITF the haulier that brought the action over livestock protesters, might be facing a costs order running into six figures (CM6-12 February).

Let's review what happened here: a tax-paying haulier, going about its lawful business, was attacked by self-righteous thugs in the name of animal welfare. It wasn't protected by police so it went to court to establish its right to that protection.

Isn't it a pity that the only people who broke the law in this affair—the demonstrators—were not made to pay for the mayhem and misery they created. I'd like to see how their much lauded principles would last if they were faced with having to pay for it financially.

Geoff Inge, Barnstaple.


comments powered by Disqus