AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

What is Evidence for Contract Switch?

15th June 1962, Page 65
15th June 1962
Page 65
Page 65, 15th June 1962 — What is Evidence for Contract Switch?
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?

rAN a haulier enter into a contract 16--• with a customer on the strength of which he obtains a contract A licence and then, after operating for

s'tort time uneconomically, come back to the Licensing Authority for a full A licence?

This seems the question to be decided ry the Metropolitan Licensing Authority, 4r, D. I. R. Muir, when he considers :is decision—now reserved—in an appliation by S. and S. Contracts, Ltd., of infield Highway, London, for a 6-vehicle switch.

A great part of the inquiry, which asted several days, was devoted to the ■ utcome of a grant, made by the authority last November, of six vehicles m A licence to a sister company of and S. Contracts--Sheppherds Transort (Enfield), Ltd.

From figures produced in connection iith this grant, it appeared that one of he vehicles was employed almost the /hole of the time carrying general goods .utwards from London.

A witness called by British Road lervices, who were one of nearly 20 .bjectors, said that if the position of urniture manufacturers worsened (one the reasons for the application was aid to be a recession in the furniture rade), the vehicles, if granted to S. and . on a "mainly new furniture" basis, could be used to carry other goods.

During the inquiry, too, it was uggested that certain contracts entered ato were very "one sided." They were ■ ased on the invoice price of the goods ielivered, irrespective of distance, and id not contain a rise and fall clause. Counsel for the independent objectors, Mr. M. H. Jackson-Lipkin, submitted that the applicants knew full well what they were getting themselves into when they took on the contracts because, in May, 1961, they had applied to convert a contract licence with the Dependable Furniture Company, Ltd., into an open A licence, but had later withdrawn the application. So, at that time. they knew they could not cone. Yet only a few days later they took out another contract licence for four vehicles for another firm.

Mr. Jackson-Lipkin'sifinal words were: " imprudent contracts are not the basis of open A licences. Hiring customers should not be subsidized by an applicant at the expense of other hauliers."


comments powered by Disqus