AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Southend Excursion

14th May 1937, Page 48
14th May 1937
Page 48
Page 48, 14th May 1937 — Southend Excursion
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?

APPEALS by 13 operators against the Metropolitan Traffic Corrunissioner's refusal to allow express and excursion and tour services from London to Southerfd to be continued until October 19, were heard last week. The illuminations at Southend continue until this date. The appellants were:— A. Tirapson and Sons, Ltd.; Venture Transport I}Tendon), Ltd.; Classique Coaches, Ltd.; Lewis Cronshaw, Ltd.; W. E. and J. Britten; Cliffs. Saloon Coaches, Ltd.; IL C. Porter; A. H. Clark (Eastern Belle Caachenl; C. G. Lewis; T. G. Green; W. ...T. Pike, Ltd.; George Ewer and Co., Ltd.; Surrey Motors, Ltd.

The general principle has been for summer services to terminate on September 30, partly for the protection of services operated all the year round. Last September, the Commissioner heard a number of applications for petmission to extend the period of operation of services to Southend until the -termination of the illuminations on October 19.

He decided to authorize experimental operation up to October 7.. On that date he heard applications from. 28 operators (one was cancelled) for permission to continue up to October 19. Evidence of operation during the week ended October 7 showed that the midweek traffic was not considerable. On the Saturday and Sunday, however, a comparatively large number of passengers was conveyed.

Weather conditions were particularly favourable, and, ill the Commissioner's opinion, allowance would have to be made for less clement weather conditions, and for a progressive falling-off in traffic with each succeeding week in October.

The Commissioner found that the number of passengers carried during the experimental week would have justified a further extension on certain days, hut he was satisfied that the ordinary regular facilities were reasonably convenient and he refused the applications.

When applying for the renewal of licences for 1937, various operators (including the appellants) again sought an extension up to October 19, and the concession was refused.