1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172 
Joint Fares Not Shared Properly, Say Council
Page 120
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
JOINT services operated by Nottingham Corporation and West Bridgford Urban District Council have been running for seven years without a satisfactory agreement between the two parties. This was stated by Mr. A. G. Mansfield, clerk to the urban council, at a sitting of the East Midland Traffic Commissioners, last week.
Claiming that receipts on the routes between West Bridgford and Nottingham city centre were not shared quite properly," he asked the Commissioners to give a ruling on the matter. He said the urban council wanted legal equality with the corporation, and were anxious to pro
ssI6
tect the public, because the existing agreement allowed the services to be terminated by either side at a month's notice. They also wanted to resolve any doubts about the legal position. Mr. Mansfield explained that the existing agreement was drawn up in 1930, and there was no clear basis for the sharing of fares on the through services. Figures for 1956-57 showed that total receipts were £133,916. Of this sum £11,760 was taken in the city and, under the terms of the agreement, went to Nottingham Corporation. In West Bridgford, £17,235 was taken and this belonged to the urban council. The point in dispute was the remaining £104,921 which was taken in through fares. If something transpired to affect the services there would be no ruling onthe matter. Despite attempts by West Bridgford to negotiate with the corporation, no satisfactory agreement had been reached.
Mr. A. G-_ Curtis, chairman, suggested during the hearing that the termination agreement could be changed from one to six months' notice, which would protect the public. Later he said West Bridgford were perhaps not clear about the agreement.
The hearing was adjourned.