AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Restrictions on new licence

15th June 1989, Page 24
15th June 1989
Page 24
Page 24, 15th June 1989 — Restrictions on new 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?

• A company which does not want to acquire any vehicles has been granted an operator's licence by Scottish Deputy Licensing Authority Ramsay Dalgety at a Dumfries public inquiry.

Petfood processor Dunlop Proteins of Collin had applied for a licence authorising 12 vehicles and five trailers. The application attracted representations from a neighbouring resident, R A Robison, who was concerned about vehicles using the access road at all hours of the day and night; about damage to a nearby railway bridge, about cracks in his garden wall; and about nuisance from smells and noise.

Dunlop's general manager, Ian Hunter, said that at the moment material was brought into the factory by outside contractors and the petfood was sold ex-works. If the licence was granted, there would be no change to that strategy. It was not the company's intention to acquire any vehicles: it wanted the licence only as emergency cover in case of industrial action by its transport contractor's employees, or if it should ever be held to commercial ransom by hauliers. If such an emergency arose, vehicles would be hired in on a short-term basis.

It was indicated that the site was an existing operating centre because the previous owners of the business had held a licence. The hearing was adjourned until the following morning, when Dalgety was told that the parties had reached an agreement. The DLA then granted a licence with conditions restricting the hours when vehicles and trailers could enter and leave the factory, and prohibiting the maintenance, servicing or repair of vehicles and trailers.