AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

THREE ON B LICENCE REFUSED

13th March 1964, Page 51
13th March 1964
Page 51
Page 51, 13th March 1964 — THREE ON B LICENCE REFUSED
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?

A N application by Ritsons Haulage Ltd.

was refused by Mr. G. Newman, the North Western deputy Licensing Authority at Liverpool on Tuesday when the company asked for three vehicles of 131 tons on B licence to carry meat and foodstuffs within 10 miles and to Manchester. Mr. J. Edward Jones, for Ritsons, said that one vehicle was to be acquired and two •were on contract to Towers Co. Ltd. If the application was granted the Contract A licence would be surrendered.

The Towers company imported meat, and British Road Services, as well as Ritsons, carried some of the traffic. Complaints regarding late deliveries because of lack of transport facilities had been received by the applicant and the company considered that a grant would create greater versatility within the fleet.

Mr. J. E. Ritson, managing director, said that during the past two years traffic had been sub-contracted to B.R.S., who had been paid £49,000. He told Mr. J. Lawton, objecting for B.R.S., that this organization carried the bulk of Towers' traffic.

Met. Revocation Inquiries

THE Metropolitan Licensing Authority. Mr. D. 1. R. Muir, on Wednesday adjourned an inquiry under section 178(1)(d) of the Road Traffic Act, 1960, in which he is considering whether to revoke A and B licences held by B. R. Saunders of Hersham. Saunders admitted in evidence applying for a B-licence renewal at a time when he had no vehicle operating under the licence. He also admitted using an untaxed vehicle and displaying an A licence disc on a vehicle which was specified in a B licence.

After Mr. Muir had suggested that Saunders was "an expert" at applying for temporary substitutions he adjourned the case to allow Saunders to obtain evidence on the operations of the A and B licences in connection with the renewal and variation application in respect of them, Mr. Muir, at the same inquiry, decided to take no action when he was told by operator Mr. A..1. Winkfield that he had decided to surrender a one-vehicle A licence. Mr. Muir had earlier served Winkfield with a notice that he proposed to consider whether to revoke the licence.

The Authority was told that the matter had come to light when the vehicle was stopped in the north. Winkfield believed that the vehicle he had purchased from Saunders was authorized in an A licence as it carried an A-licence disc, But it was subsequently discovered that the vehicle was specified in a B licence. Winkfield told the Authority he intended to apply to the East Midland Authority to have the vehicle specified in a Contract A licence.


comments powered by Disqus