AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

BID FOR NINE ON A LICENCE

13th May 1966, Page 62
13th May 1966
Page 62
Page 62, 13th May 1966 — BID FOR NINE ON A LICENCE
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?

ANT application by Thomas Mitchell (Haulage) Ltd., of Ettrick Bridge, Hawick, for a new A licence and an A licence variation was adjourned after a hearing at Edinburgh on Monday. The applicant sought nine new vehicles of

tons to carry livestock, agricultural produce and requisites within 80 miles; timber within the Scottish area to England and Wales; dead meat from Thomas Borthwick and Sons Ltd. and Border Meat Market Co. to the Midlands and Smithfield Market, London, and parcels from the hosiery and tweed industry in Edinburgh and the Borders to London and Prestwick. Also a 7-ton vehicle to replace one of 3tons.

Objectors were John Russell (Grangemouth) Ltd., Road Services (Caledonian) Ltd., British Road Services, Blue Band Motors, Lockerbie Transport and J. W. Watt Ltd.

Mr. C. R. Oliver, who represented the applicants, acquired the business of Thomas Mitchell last September. transferred the existing licences to his own name and then to a new company under the present name.

Efforts were made on behalf of the objectors to suggest that the business had been operated illegally by Mr. Oliver, but documents showed that the purchase and transfer were subject to the grant of the licences.

The applicants sought to run a parcels service from Hawick to London, and five of the country's leading hosiery mills indicated support for a direct Hawick-London trunk service. On the meat side, it was said that a new slaughterhouse was pending at Hawick due to start in September or October with a killing capacity of 600 sheep per day and 100 head of cattle. Mr. G. Orrniston, chairman of Thomas Mitchell, claimed that this new development demanded a ready source of local traffic to handle the expansion of business.

On the timber side evidence was given of increased felling and cutting of timber within the Border area and delivery to Hexham, Wallsend and Ellesmere Port for pit use, chipboard manufacture and pulping.

Mr. T. H. Campbell Wardlaw and Mr. J. Loudon, for the objectors. claimed that the proposed grant was not justified on evidence. It was completely new traffic for the operators, they said, who were very new and inexperienced in this traffic. and Mr. Oliver was using his links with the textile industry on the Borders to secure new business which was already catered for by existing hauliers.


comments powered by Disqus